Re: Extensionless headers

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>]

Nathan Myers <ncm-nospam@cantrip.org> writes:

[...]

| The problem is the proliferation of extensionless names.  Can I count 
| on anybody to keep up-to-date a complete list of all the sources and 
| their types in conveniently machine-readable form?  The filename
| extensions had done that for us, and for our tools, automatically.

If you're after .cc or .tcc files, those aren't changed.  Right?
The remaining is the headers.

| > Since this list has seen unnecessary inflammatory rhetorics on that
| > issue, I would like to see at least one compelling reason justifying
| > those inflammatory rhetorics.
| 
| The long-standing written policy is to maintain filename extensions.  
| It seems to me that the burden of proof should be upon those arguing 
| to abandon this industry-wide organizational tool.

Tool for what exactly? Syntax highlighting? No, since the files were
interpreted as C header files.  Find?  There are three types of files,
headers, .cc and .tcc.  That settles the problem and its solution.
And here, we're aren't inventing since evidence has been provided that
industry-wide libraries are using the same scheme.

-- Gaby
CodeSourcery, LLC                       http://www.codesourcery.com