-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 55
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Should I move printf.c and printf.h into a subdirectory? #58
Comments
Larger projects usually have struture like But it's probably beneficial only if you want to separate headers from sources, because otherwise, header prom same directory has highest inclusion priority and there is no issue if user has some other |
Some put everything in
But that's not my suggested use. If you build the library with CMake, then install it (for example, under
and the CMake files set up the targets for you, so you don't get any collisions. If you are worried about collisions, you can install under By the way - our use of |
Both files could be merged into one, turning the library in a single header library, like |
@edubart : Please open a separate issue for that request. |
…of the source files into a library-specific subdirectory, as per #58, there is no longer the risk of clashing with glibc's `printf.h`, so the test programs can use `<foo.h>`-style inclusion rather than `"../path/to/foo.h"`-style.
…of the source files into a library-specific subdirectory, as per #58, there is no longer the risk of clashing with glibc's `printf.h`, so the test programs can use `<foo.h>`-style inclusion rather than `"../path/to/foo.h"`-style.
…of the source files into a library-specific subdirectory, as per #58, there is no longer the risk of clashing with glibc's `printf.h`, so the test programs can use `<foo.h>`-style inclusion rather than `"../path/to/foo.h"`-style.
…of the source files into a library-specific subdirectory, as per #58, there is no longer the risk of clashing with glibc's `printf.h`, so the test programs can use `<foo.h>`-style inclusion rather than `"../path/to/foo.h"`-style.
…of the source files into a library-specific subdirectory, as per #58, there is no longer the risk of clashing with glibc's `printf.h`, so the test programs can use `<foo.h>`-style inclusion rather than `"../path/to/foo.h"`-style.
…of the source files into a library-specific subdirectory, as per #58, there is no longer the risk of clashing with glibc's `printf.h`, so the test programs can use `<foo.h>`-style inclusion rather than `"../path/to/foo.h"`-style.
…of the source files into a library-specific subdirectory, as per #58, there is no longer the risk of clashing with glibc's `printf.h`, so the test programs can use `<foo.h>`-style inclusion rather than `"../path/to/foo.h"`-style.
…of the source files into a library-specific subdirectory, as per #58, there is no longer the risk of clashing with glibc's `printf.h`, so the test programs can use `<foo.h>`-style inclusion rather than `"../path/to/foo.h"`-style.
The repository root has a bunch of non-source files in addition to
printf.c
andprintf.h
; this is slightly distracting and messy. In larger repositories, one typically places the sources files in (one or more) subdirectories, and none of them in the repository root.Should we, then, create a
src
/source
subdirectory, and movieprintf.h
andprintf.c
into it?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: