Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!sjsca4!poffen
From: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: best extension for C++ files
Message-ID: <1990Sep5.192730.26829@sj.ate.slb.com>
Date: 5 Sep 90 19:27:30 GMT
References: <907@zinn.MV.COM> <1845@cs.rit.edu>
Reply-To: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger)
Organization: Schlumberger Technologies, San Jose, CA.
Lines: 20

In article <1845@cs.rit.edu> jeh@cs.rit.edu writes:
>From article <907@zinn.MV.COM>, by mjv@objects.mv.com (Michael J. Vilot):
>> Actually, the problem is not with source files, but with _header_ files.
>> It will be extremely awkward to share libraries if one vendor uses .h, 
>> another uses .hxx and another uses .hpp.
>> 
>I have always used ".H", to go along with ".C".  I have never thought of
>a reason why this would be bad.
>

Ar you saying 'H' as in upper case, as opposed to 'h' in lower case? The
problem with this is that some OS's are not case sensitive. Certainly DOS isn't
so 'H' and 'h' mean the same thing as far as a file name goes. UNIX is case
sensitive, but certainly isn't the only platform for doing C++ development.


Russ Poffenberger               DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com
Schlumberger Technologies       UUCP:   {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen
1601 Technology Drive		CIS:	72401,276
San Jose, Ca. 95110             (408)437-5254