Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: <03df01c16be2$b45ded80$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> From: "Robert Collins" To: Subject: looking for c++ indent Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:29:56 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Nov 2001 01:35:42.0875 (UTC) FILETIME=[822BEEB0:01C16BE3] The standard gnu indent is doing horrible things.. i.e. @@ -97,7 +102,8 @@ auth_retry: if (code < 200 || code >= 300) { - delete c; + delete + c; return; } Now, I'm of the opinion that second guessing your indent tool is a waste of time - may as well not have one. However, I'm quite happy to use a different indent tool, that stays with GNU indenting rules, but understands c++ well enough not to do the sort of idiocy show above. I don't have the time to research a replacement just now, or to fix indent itself, and it's a low priority - indent is consistent in what it does, not random, so diffs should be small from now on in. If someone here can suggest a better indent.. I'll take a look. Alternatively (preferred actually, but I don't wish to impinge on other folks time) if someone wanted to hack indent to be c++ aware (ideally including making things like headers with #ifdef __cplusplus extern "C" { #endif not indent the exported stuff.. that would be great. Rob