From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri May  1 16:50:51 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C39A1065674
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  1 May 2009 16:50:51 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com)
Received: from mail.bitblocks.com (mail.bitblocks.com [64.142.15.60])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C3438FC29
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  1 May 2009 16:50:51 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com)
Received: from bitblocks.com (localhost.bitblocks.com [127.0.0.1])
	by mail.bitblocks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 576465B3B;
	Fri,  1 May 2009 09:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Matthew Fleming" <matthew.fleming@isilon.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 01 May 2009 08:57:34 PDT."
	<06D5F9F6F655AD4C92E28B662F7F853E02ACA843@seaxch09.desktop.isilon.com> 
References: <49F4070C.2000108@gmx.de><20090428114754.GB89235@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
	<49FAE4EA.1010205@gmx.de>
	<06D5F9F6F655AD4C92E28B662F7F853E02ACA843@seaxch09.desktop.isilon.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Matthew Fleming" <matthew.fleming@isilon.com>
	message dated "Fri, 01 May 2009 08:57:34 -0700."
Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 09:31:08 -0700
From: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com>
Message-Id: <20090501163108.576465B3B@mail.bitblocks.com>
Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: C++ incompatability, was C99: Suggestions for style(9) 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 16:50:52 -0000

On Fri, 01 May 2009 08:57:34 PDT "Matthew Fleming" <matthew.fleming@isilon.com>  wrote:
> [snip exciting discussion on style]
> 
> > There are several C99 features used already, e.g. designated initializers:
> >	bla bli = { .blub = "foo", .arr[0] = 42 };
> > Do you suggest that this should not be used, because it is inconsistent
> > with all the other existing compound initialisations?
> 
> Regarding this great feature of C99, sadly, it's not C++ compatible.  So
> while designated initializers in a C source file are great, in a header
> file they will give a compile error if included in e.g. a C++ kernel
> module (which otherwise would work fine).

Why would you put initializers in a header file? If included
in more than one file, the linker will complain that the
initialized variable is multiply defined.  If creating header
files that get included in in only one file *and* you want to
use initializers, why not use the right language for include
file code.