From: Lars Gullik Bjønnes (larsbj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-06-11 06:07:31
"John Maddock" <john_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> Is there a good reason that the config library needs to use a
>> "creative" choice of file extensions rather than the boost standard
>> of ".*pp"?
| Well they're not really complete .cpp files, and they're not headers as such
| either - more like snippets of code that get #included by various other
| files (the .cpp ones, and the configure script), so I wanted something
| distinctive to separate them from regular source and header files.
Then perhaps using some extension that is not a common C++ extension
would be better?
I know that gcc uses .tcc for something similar to this.
(mostly for explict template instantiations)
As for "standard" extensions, g++ recognizes these as C++ source: cc,
cp, cxx, cpp, c++ and C
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk