Kevin Lawton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It is ugly IMHO, and should not be used for permanent code, especially
> > considering the code fragment may have many levels of nested #ifdefs
> > etc or be very large in size. To me the "//" sequence is very clean,
> > and stands out against the code well. And one can get *very*
> > burned by having mismatching C comments if you don't close
> > them well.
The only problem I see with C++ style comments is that they are not
part of the C standard, and there are C compilers out there that
choke on them.
Now, we could simply take the point of view that we write code that
is only supposed to be compiled with gcc, and that's it. On the other
hand, I'm not convinced that comments are an important reason enough
to drop portability ...
(As a side note, in Wine we are bound to use gcc extensions due to a few
critical issues, like the need to use 'stdcall' calling convention etc.
Still, we don't use C++ comments, because all compiler dependency is
supposed to be hidden under #define's, which is hard to do with
comments ...)
Bye,
Ulrich
