Re: [Numpy-discussion] C99

On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:24 PM Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 11:02 AM Ralf Gommers > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 6:07 AM Charles R Harris < >> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:02 AM Eric Wieser >>> wrote: >>> Th

Re: [Numpy-discussion] C99

On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 11:02 AM Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 6:07 AM Charles R Harris > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:02 AM Eric Wieser >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks for the first step on this! >>> >>> Should we allow // style comments >>> >>> I don’t think it matter

Re: [Numpy-discussion] C99

On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 6:07 AM Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:02 AM Eric Wieser > wrote: > >> Thanks for the first step on this! >> >> Should we allow // style comments >> >> I don’t think it matters too much. I think it might be a little messy to >> have a mix of the tw

Re: [Numpy-discussion] C99

On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:02 AM Eric Wieser wrote: > Thanks for the first step on this! > > Should we allow // style comments > > I don’t think it matters too much. I think it might be a little messy to > have a mix of the two styles where // means “post py3” and /* */ means > pre-py3 - but at th

Re: [Numpy-discussion] C99

Thanks for the first step on this! Should we allow // style comments I don’t think it matters too much. I think it might be a little messy to have a mix of the two styles where // means “post py3” and /* */ means pre-py3 - but at the same time, I do slightly prefer the C++-style. For C contributo

[Numpy-discussion] C99

Hi All, I've a PR up converting travis testing to use C99 . I suspect we may not want to merge it for a while, but it does raise a couple of style questions that we should probably settle up front. Namely: - Should we allow // style comments - Sho