One is enough. As it should have been for loop constructs.
--
Sylvain
Hi,
My _OPINION_ on those tradeoffs, compilation speed/optimization/speed of
execution/execution context, where "usually" I draw my red lines:
Use of makefiles: the main rational of makefiles is to re/compile/re/link only
what is needed to generate the final products and that in order to
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 3:57 AM Martin Tournoij wrote:
>
> The coding style says:
>
> > Use /* */ for comments, not //
>
> Don't want to start a discussion about it, but I'm curious why // is
> disallowed? AFAIK all compilers accept // these days, and have for a
> long time?
My understanding is
[2018-12-27 08:01] Cág
> Silvan Jegen wrote:
>
> > I also prefer // (mostly because to insert those I can just do a block
> > insert in vim/vis). The only downside of //-style comments that I can
> > see is that they are only allowed since C99[0].
> >
> > Maybe I am missing something too though.
That is a rather bold sentiment.
At uni the attitude is opposite - I actually saw home assignments
stating "remember to use many comments to make the code more
readable".
I actually agree with you; there is much less clutter if the comments
don't duplicate that which is already communicated
Silvan Jegen wrote:
I also prefer // (mostly because to insert those I can just do a block
insert in vim/vis). The only downside of //-style comments that I can
see is that they are only allowed since C99[0].
Maybe I am missing something too though.
I use vi[0] and have this in my .exrc:
map
> On Dec 27, 2018, at 12:36 AM, Martin Tournoij wrote:
> I am disappointed to see that clang compilation speeds are a lot slower
> than what they used to be. The disadvantage of tcc is that it does
> almost no optimisations, so even simple programs will run slower. My
> solution is to use tcc
Hi
[2018-12-27 17:27] Martin Tournoij
>
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018, at 08:46, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
> > // is not ANSI.
>
> Is there a good reason for sticking with ANSI C? It's my understanding
> that even most small/minimal compilers support C99 (or most of it)?
>
> The coding style document even
Hi
[2018-12-27 00:56] Martin Tournoij
> The coding style says:
>
> > Use /* */ for comments, not //
>
> Don't want to start a discussion about it, but I'm curious why // is
> disallowed? AFAIK all compilers accept // these days, and have for a
> long time?
>
> I've always preferred // since they
