Re: RFC: change in policy for include guards

On 13/02/2014 7:30 a.m., Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On 02/12/2014 01:41 AM, Kinkie wrote:
>>> These provide some very useful info:
>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2027991/list-of-standard-header-files-in-c-and-c
>>> http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/
>>>
>>> I would draw the line at ANSI C-style and C++ headers.
>>>
>>> Proposal:
>>>
>>> * system C headers (with a .h suffix):
>>> - always include with <>
>>> - mandatory HAVE_FOO_H wrapper
>>> - avoid where C++ alternative is available
>>>
>>> * system C++ headers (without any extension suffix):
>>> - always include with <>
>>> - omit any HAVE_ wrapper
>>> - if the file is not portable, do not use it
>>>
>>> * custom headers provided by Squid:
>>> - omit wrappers
>>> - always include with ""
>>> - use full path (only src/ prefix may be omitted)
>>>
>>>
>>> Also, for now restricting ourselves to the C++98 set of headers since we
>>> have not made C++11 support mandatory yet.
>>
>> Hi,
>> perfectly in line with what I had in mind. +1 from me.
>
>
> Sounds good to me too.
>
> Alex.
>

Since tomorrow will be day 10 and we have not and any disagreements
mentioned I am updating the wiki with the above guidelines.

Amos
Received on Fri Feb 21 2014 - 00:23:47 MST