Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!taumet!steve
From: steve@taumet.com (Stephen Clamage)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: best extension for C++ files
Message-ID: <451@taumet.com>
Date: 11 Sep 90 15:41:23 GMT
References: <907@zinn.MV.COM> <1845@cs.rit.edu> <3358@stl.stc.co.uk> <1990Sep08.094000.10269@virtech.uucp> <144@tdatirv.UUCP>
Organization: Taumetric Corporation, San Diego
Lines: 24

sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) writes:

>In article <1990Sep08.094000.10269@virtech.uucp> rdg@virtech.uucp (Roger D. Gough) writes:
>>Maybe this would simply add to the confusion, but why not just use '.c'
>>and '.h', and let whoever needs to know look in the makefile (or equivalent)
>>to see how CC is defined, etc.

>The big problem with this is when one needs to *mix* C and C++ sources in a
>single project (as, for instance, in converting from C to C++ on an existing
>product).  In this case the *single* makefile needs to be able to tell for
>each source file whether it is C or C++ to call the right compiler.

If you include a build line for each file (or for each file of either C
or C++ at minimum), it doesn't matter that the file endings are the same.
This is not as onerous as it sounds, since I find for projects of any
size, the set of header-file dependencies for different source files
is different, and thus requires at least a dependency line for most
files.

The nice thing about text editors is that it is simple to add the lines
to the make file -- and in any event, you only have to do it once!
-- 

Steve Clamage, TauMetric Corp, steve@taumet.com