From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=47046 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PeAEy-00067e-7z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:48:41 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <weil@mail.berlios.de>) id 1PeAAu-0005A9-6U
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:44:29 -0500
Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.8]:53140)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <weil@mail.berlios.de>) id 1PeAAt-00059s-Rf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:44:28 -0500
Message-ID: <4D31DCF7.2060909@mail.berlios.de>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 18:44:23 +0100
From: Stefan Weil <weil@mail.berlios.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: mass comment conversion from C99 to C89
References: <AANLkTinTgOoBtt=aTBiJQx3cJ5LBzqo_c7mPePEXuNhM@mail.gmail.com>
	<1295112015.2795.6.camel@Quad>
In-Reply-To: <1295112015.2795.6.camel@Quad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Cc: Laurent Vivier <Laurent@vivier.eu>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

Am 15.01.2011 18:20, schrieb Laurent Vivier:
> Le samedi 15 janvier 2011 à 16:02 +0000, Blue Swirl a écrit :
>> With the sed script below (my first I think), I'm able to convert most
>
> nice script. Did you try awk ?
>
>> files in QEMU from C99 comment style to C89. When successive line with
>> C99 comments are converted, the comments are merged. Two files
>
> [ This remembers me the port of gstreamer to AIX using xlc, which was
> C89 only... ]
>
>> (hw/rtl8139.c and microblaze-dis.c) still fail.
>>
>> Is this a good idea?
>
> I think line like:
>
> //#define DEBUG
>
> should be changed to
>
> #if 0
> #define DEBUG
> #endif
>
> as it is not really a comment but a flag.

The pattern //~ is also some kind of flag.

I must admit that I introduced some of these lines because
my favorite editor (SciTE) allows to toggle these
lines to code.

Laurent's solution would be fine for those, too.
It's also possible to replace all #if 0 by #if 1
to test compilation of debug code.

Is there an urgent need to fix all C99 comments?

I'd appreciate to see blanks at line endings or
tabs fixed, too. At least fixing the blanks is
much easier than fixing C99 comments.

Regards,
Stefan