I'm of the opinion that comments should have no impact on how the code works.
That's like programming languages 101

-----Original Message-----
From: Std-Proposals <std-proposals-bounces_at_lists.isocpp.org> On Behalf Of Frederick Virchanza Gotham via Std-Proposals
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2025 10:30 AM
To: std-proposals_at_[hidden].org
Cc: Frederick Virchanza Gotham <cauldwell.thomas_at_[hidden]ail.com>
Subject: Re: [std-proposals] Specify the mangled name

On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 11:07 PM Thiago Macieira wrote:
>
> > #include <vector> // fwd[std::vector]
>
> Let's not do that. Having something that works with both old and new
> preprocessors (because this is what it is) is a recipe for trouble
> because it would change what does become visible to the compiler. Or,
> for that matter, for the preprocessor itself: will the above define __cpp_lib_ranges?


We sort of already have this problem. For example:

    #include <cstdint>
    uint_fast32_t my_global_variable;

This will work fine on some compilers, and fail to compile on others.


> Not to mention that it's a horrible idea to do it with a comment. This
> might require major changes to it (I don't know whether comments are
> processed before #includes are expanded) and it might collide with
> comments people already put there. We don't want toolchains to
> suddenly start mis-interpreting a comment added in 1993.


So we make it very unique so that 'cppcheck' or whatever doesn't think we're trying to talk to it.
--
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]rg
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals