Lex Trotman wrote:
> I have thought about which types should be "automagically" present in
> Geany without a tags file, and I do not think the intN_t types
> qualify. They are not fundamental,
In C99 they are.
> they require header <cstdint> to
Thats C++. I'm pretty sure all the C99 intN_t types were added to
the latest C++ standard as well.
> Also it is bad practice to be using fixed size types, especially as
> they are not actually guaranteed to exist.
All compliant C99 implementations *must* provide the standard intN_t types.
> If they are used they
> should be typedefed to a more user friendly name.
I am sure I am not the only one who considers
typedef int32_t my_project_int16_t ;
to be bad practice.
> So I suggest that only the fundamental types and <cstddef> types
> size_t, nullptr_t ptrdiff_t and max_align_t should be available by
> adding them to the secondary keyword list for C++.
Please do not conflate C++ with C.
Erik
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erik de Castro Lopo
http://www.mega-nerd.com/
_______________________________________________
Geany-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
