Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 03 Oct 2003 16:02:34 +0200 | From | "Ihar 'Philips' Filipau" <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |