You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The existing headers are really close to C… I think they would actually be usable as C if the functions just had C linkage.
You also have a #pragma once and #ifdef-based guards, you could get rid of one… IIRC #pragma once requires C11 (though AFAIK all compilers support it), so it would be nice if you got rid of the #pragma once.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'll definitely add the C linkage. I designed the API to be usable from C,
but I hadn't added the linkage yet as I hadn't had a chance to test it yet.
Agreed that if one goes, it should be #pragma once.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:10 AM, Evan Nemerson [email protected]
wrote:
The existing headers are really close to C… I think they would actually
be usable as C if the functions just had C linkage.
You also have a #pragma once and #ifdef-based guards, you could get rid
of one… IIRC #pragma once requires C11 (though AFAIK all compilers
support it), so it would be nice if you got rid of the #pragma once.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #6.
The existing headers are really close to C… I think they would actually be usable as C if the functions just had C linkage.
You also have a
#pragma once
and#ifdef
-based guards, you could get rid of one… IIRC#pragma once
requires C11 (though AFAIK all compilers support it), so it would be nice if you got rid of the#pragma once
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: