I'm sorry, I suppose I should have asked "why use c89 at all?" :)
Did you try the suggestion that I made, or is it not appropriate? If not, how do you, as a human being, identify between the c89 and the c99 source files? Max > -----Original Message----- > From: Yakov Lerner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 11:35 AM > To: Max Dyckhoff > Cc: Russell Bateman; Vim List > Subject: Re: how to detect c99 vs c89 (//-comments vs /*-comments) > > On 6/20/06, Max Dyckhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Can anyone tell me why anyone cares about the styles of comments? I > > understand that it is important to adhere to standards, but I can't work > > out why comments need to be in one of the two forms. Why not just use // > > for inline comments and /**/ for function/block comments? > > Because c89 does not have //-comments. This rule you suggested > is fine for c99, but it does not work for c89. > > The modified form of your rule would be "For c89, always use /**/. > For c99, use // for ..., and /**/ for ...". > > But then I need the script to know c89 from c99. > > Yakov
