Editing Online Developer Meeting (2021-10-26)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
See bug report [https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?61370 bug #61370] and also comments 39 and 40 in [https://octave.discourse.group/t/using-m-prefix-for-member-variables-in-c-classes/1517 this discourse discussion] for some motivating examples of cases where it might be simpler to expect that Octave header files will be compiled by a C++ compiler. | See bug report [https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?61370 bug #61370] and also comments 39 and 40 in [https://octave.discourse.group/t/using-m-prefix-for-member-variables-in-c-classes/1517 this discourse discussion] for some motivating examples of cases where it might be simpler to expect that Octave header files will be compiled by a C++ compiler. | ||
* Go ahead and remove support for compiling these headers in C. jwe will go through the sources and evaluate uses of <code>#ifdef __cplusplus</code>. | ** Go ahead and remove support for compiling these headers in C. jwe will go through the sources and evaluate uses of <code>#ifdef __cplusplus</code>. | ||
=== <code>spawn</code> with <code>P_OVERLAY</code> works differently on POSIX and Windows === | === <code>spawn</code> with <code>P_OVERLAY</code> works differently on POSIX and Windows === |