Re: [platform-testers] groff 1.23.0.rc3 on native Windows

[G. Branden Robinson]

At 2023-03-12T19:36:50+0100, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2023, 18:50 G. Branden Robinson <
> g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Good enough for me!  I used <stdint.h> because groff's application
> > of C++ is 30 years old, and has not yet transitioned to the new
> > inclusion style.  (I'd have done so, but I haven't looked up
> > precisely what the ramifications of that are, and didn't want to fix
> > something that wasn't operationally broken.  Maybe for groff 1.24.)
> >
> 
> I'd ask you to not do that.  The <c*> headers don't buy you much, and
> instead adds more divergence from C.  BTW, the C++ committee is
> considering undeprecating the C headers, since realistically they'll
> need to be supported basically forever.

My understanding of the future status quo (from occasional browsing of
the WG14 Document Log[1], I think) is that the <c*> headers will
continue to be preferred for "C++ mode" compilation, but that the old
<*.h> form is acceptable (or required) for stuff inside extern "C".

But there is time both for this issue to settle out and for me to be
corrected on the point; such a refactor is not high on my priority list.

Regards,
Branden

[1] https://www.open-std.org/JTC1/sc22/wg14/www/wg14_document_log.htm

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature