|
- *. h or *. hpp for your C++ headers class definitions
another convention is to use h for C headers and hpp for C++; a good example would be the boost library Quote from Boost FAQ, File extensions communicate the "type" of the file, both to humans and to computer programs The ' h' extension is used for C header files, and therefore communicates the wrong thing about C++ header files
- c++ - . c vs . cc vs. . cpp vs . hpp vs . h vs . cxx - Stack Overflow
* h or * hpp for your class definitions What is the difference between cc and cpp file suffix? I used to think that it used to be that: h files are header files for C and C++, and usually only contain declarations c files are C source code cpp files are C++ source code (which can also be C source code)
- c++ - #include in . h or . c . cpp? - Stack Overflow
In callback h you should include everything needed to compile against it But nothing more But nothing more Consider whether using forward declarations in your header file (such as class GtkButton; ) will suffice, allowing you to reduce the number of #include directives in the header (and, in turn, my compilation time and complexity)
- 有问题，就会有答案 - 知乎
知乎，中文互联网高质量的问答社区和创作者聚集的原创内容平台，于 2011 年 1 月正式上线，以「让人们更好的分享知识、经验和见解，找到自己的解答」为品牌使命。知乎凭借认真、专业、友善的社区氛围、独特的产品机制以及结构化和易获得的优质内容，聚集了中文互联网科技、商业、影视、时
- How does #include lt;bits stdc++. h gt; work in C++? [duplicate]
Se e g GCC 4 8 0 bits stdc++ h source Using it would include a lot of unnecessary stuff and increases compilation time Edit: As Neil says, it's an implementation for precompiled headers If you set it up for precompilation correctly it could, in fact, speed up compilation time depending on your project
|
|
|