7 ms·
They were only advocating no extension for executable shell files, not all files.
by kondro 13y ago
They were only advocating no extension for executable shell files, not all files.
- raverbashing 13y agoYes, I remembered seeing a C++ google product without the .h extension in header files (or other similar extensions) But apparently they stopped this nonsense
- ithkuil 13y agoIt's not google, it's C++ convention. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/301586/what-is-the-difference-between-using-includefilename-and-includefilename-h http://stackoverflow.com/questions/301586/what-is-the-differ... Btw, many editors understand // -- C++ -- Nevertheless Google's c++ style guide (https://code.google.com/p/google-styleguide/source/browse/trunk/cppguide.xml https://code.google.com/p/google-styleguide/source/browse/tr...) in fact says that headers should have the .h suffix.
- raverbashing 13y agoAh thanks for pointing that out > Btw, many editors understand // -- C++ -- Maybe, but if I vim /usr/include/c++/4.2.1/iostream doesn't work (only if I set it manually)