On Dec 13, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Sean Middleditch wrote: > Also, here is the C99 stdbool.h I wrote as an example. Please let me > know if this is the format you'd like these headers to be in. Mostly, > are the include guards acceptable in format,
The include guard needs to start with _ to avoid polluting the user's namespace. > and is the comment block > acceptable in detail, or is something missing? (Other than the > license.) We'll resolve the license issue separately, but other than that I think it looks fine. Any other opinions? > Should there be more comments for the macro definitions > themselves, or are suitably small, simple, obvious, self-documenting > things like that acceptable to leave without description? It would be nice to cite the standard for the various pieces :). Other than that, it looks great. Where should this go in the clang tree? I don't think putting it in clang/include/... makes sense, how about a top level stdincludes directory or something? -Chris _______________________________________________ cfe-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
