Re: [PATCH 00/37] removal of some c++ keywords

> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Is it simpler (though hacky) to just  do
>>
>> #ifdef __cplusplus
>> #define new not_new
>> #define try really_try
>> ...
>>
>> somewhere in git-compat-util.h?
>
> Very tempting, especially given that your approach automatically
> would cover topics in flight without any merge conflict ;-)
>
> I agree that it is hacky and somewhat ugly, but the hackiness
> somehow does not bother me too much in this case; perhaps because
> attempting to use a C++ compiler may already be hacky in the first
> place?
>
> It probably depends on the reason why we are doing this topic.  If a
> report about our source code coming from the C++ oriented tool cite
> the symbol names seen by machines, then the "hacky" approach will
> give us "not_new" where Brandon's patch may give us "new_oid", or
> whatever symbol that is more appropriate for the context it appears
> than such an automated cute name.
>
>> Do we use any C features that are incompatible with C++? (or do we not
>> need to care?)
>
> Good question.