On Fri, Jul 14 2017, Junio C. Hamano jotted:
> Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> writes:
>
> - This may be showing I am not just old fashioned but also am
> ignorant, but I do not see much point in using the following in
> our codebase (iow, I am not aware of places in the existing code
> that they can be improved by employing these features):
>
> . // comments
[Feel free to ignore this E-Mail and my fascination with C syntax
trivia]
I wouldn't advocate switching to them on this basis, but since you asked
for cases where things could be improved with // comments:
The other day I submitted a patch that included this line in a comment:
+ * "t/**.sh" and then conclude that there's a directory "t",
Which you fixed up to, before integrating it:
+ * "t/" + "**.sh" and then conclude that there's a directory "t",
That was only necessary due to limitations in one of two comment
syntaxes modern C supports.
Well, it wasn't *necessary*, but a compiler warned about the /* there as
a possibly confusing construct, and any compiler would have ended the
comment right there + errored out if it contained "t/**/*.sh".
