[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overf
From: |
Simon Josefsson |
Subject: |
[Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Nov 2003 05:04:25 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/22.0.0 (gnu/linux) |
Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:
> Bruno Haible <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> > And I'd omit the trailing '_p' (as I'm not a big fan of Hungarian
>> > notation :-).
>>
>> This isn't hungarian notation, it's the common notation in gnulib
>
> The vast majority of predicates in gnulib do not end in '_p', and I'd
> rather not add new predicates with '_p' suffixes. The '_p' suffix is
> philosphically related to Hungarian notation. The basic idea is that
> the type of an identifier should be related to (or deducible from) its
> name. I'm not a big fan of this idea in general, as it makes names
> longer and less readable, and in the end it tends to detract from
> readability and maintainability. Admittedly this is a minor issue.
This is not strictly related to gnulib, but since many skilled and
experienced people seemed to be on this list, I'll take my chances:
I have considered the '_t' suffix for types philosophically related to
hungarian notion (and thus avoided it). What are the opinions on
using 'foo_t' or 'foo' for new typedef's in a library? It is made
sligthtly more complicated than the '_p', or other hungarian notion
issues, because the C language already use '_t', for size_t etc.
Another option I have considered is to not use typedef at all, but
rather write 'struct foo *foo' instead of 'foo *foo' or 'foo_t *foo'.
(I got that idea from GNU lsh.) I use 'foo *foo' now, but the Emacs
font locking mechanism appear to work better with 'foo_t *foo' in some
situations (see `c-font-lock-extra-types'), but that hasn't been a
good enough argument to switch for me. (I would guess it also work
better with 'struct foo *foo' because of the 'struct' keyword.)
Tia,
Simon
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Bruno Haible, 2003/11/03
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Paul Eggert, 2003/11/03
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Bruno Haible, 2003/11/04
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Paul Eggert, 2003/11/04
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Bruno Haible, 2003/11/05
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Paul Eggert, 2003/11/05
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Bruno Haible, 2003/11/06
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Paul Eggert, 2003/11/06
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Bruno Haible, 2003/11/10
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Paul Eggert, 2003/11/10
- [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows,
Simon Josefsson <=
- [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Paul Eggert, 2003/11/19
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Bruno Haible, 2003/11/19
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Paul Eggert, 2003/11/19
- [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Simon Josefsson, 2003/11/19
- [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Simon Josefsson, 2003/11/19
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, James Youngman, 2003/11/19
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Paul Eggert, 2003/11/19
- [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Paul Eggert, 2003/11/19
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Bruno Haible, 2003/11/19
- [Bug-gnulib] Re: linebreak.c proposed patches for size-calculation overflows, Simon Josefsson, 2003/11/19