lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] linuxabi
Andries Brouwer wrote:
>
> Possibly. So we need discussion.
>
> I have registered comment #1: Al prefers the enum style.
> A possibility.
>
> Now you come with comment #2: write LINUX_MS_RDONLY instead of
> MS_RDONLY. You have not convinced me.
>

My 0.02 euro.

LINUX_* - not right stuff. It makes a lot of sence to have the same
name for same thing, even in different contexts. Or you are going to
create a hell for some-one who may wish to make a documentation.

Headers are going to be used in different context (hopefully) so
would be no collisions (hopefully).

Another question does GCC have something like C++'s namespace for C?
That's would be good. Changing names - bad.

And #define LINUX_NS(x) doesn't make sound - you will lose ability to
grep over defines and [ce]tags will not work on this anymore. cpp is not
correct tool for namespace implementation.

--
Ihar 'Philips' Filipau / with best regards from Saarbruecken.
--
"... and for $64000 question, could you get yourself vaguely
familiar with the notion of on-topic posting?"
-- Al Viro @ LKML

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:49    [W:0.056 / U:0.300 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site