Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add support for GIT_CEILING_DIRS
- From
Kevin Ballard <kevin@sb.org>
- Date
- May 14, 2008, 17:07 UTC
- Message-ID
- <71122C3E-67C8-42B0-BF95-D907718F9A57@sb.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.DEB.1.00.0805141759120.30431@racer>
On May 14, 2008, at 12:02 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Show 30 quoted lines
> On Wed, 14 May 2008, Kevin Ballard wrote:
>
>> On May 14, 2008, at 3:23 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>
>>>> @@ -414,6 +415,37 @@ const char *setup_git_directory_gently(int
>>>> *nongit_ok)
>>>> if (!getcwd(cwd, sizeof(cwd)-1))
>>>> die("Unable to read current working directory");
>>>>
>>>> + // Compute min_offset based on GIT_CEILING_DIRS.
>>>
>>> We do not like C99 style comments. Remember, there are people who
>>> compile
>>> Git on something else than the super-latest Linux with cutting-
>>> edge GCC.
>>
>> Out of curiosity, what environment these days doesn't allow C99
>> comments?
>
> On an SGI/IRIX machine I was working some time ago, GCC was too big
> for my
> quota. And the admin was not willing to install it.
>
> But I have to wonder: why argue something as C99 comments, when it
> is _no
> problem_ whatsoever to replace them with C89-style comments,
> especially
> given the fact that this makes our source code more consistent and
> thus
> easier on the eye?Oh I wasn't intending to argue, I just was curious. I'm always happy to adopt the style of the surrounding code (except when people use the One True Brace Style, ugh).
Granted, I personally prefer C99 comments for one-liners and C89 comments for multi-liners. It's especially helpful if the comment goes off the right side of the screen, because I don't have to hunt for the closing */ (source code highlighting generally solves this issue, but I don't always read code in an environment that can understand it, e.g. email).
-Kevin Ballard
-- Kevin Ballard http://kevin.sb.org kevin@sb.org http://www.tildesoft.com