Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] CODING_STYLE: Clarify style for enum and function type names

[Peter Maydell]

Since nobody seems to have disagreed, perhaps we should
just commit this?

-- PMM

On 13 January 2012 20:29, Peter Maydell <address@hidden> wrote:
> Clarify that enum type names and function type names should follow
> the CamelCase style used for structured type names.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <address@hidden>
> ---
> During a conversation on IRC with Anthony, I realised that the coding
> standard isn't entirely clear about what convention should be followed
> for enum and function types. This patch resolves that by saying they
> should be CamelCase like structured type names, based on Anthony's
> suggestion. I've tagged this as an RFC in case anybody would rather
> we went the other way instead...
>
>  CODING_STYLE |    3 ++-
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/CODING_STYLE b/CODING_STYLE
> index 6e61c49..7c82d4d 100644
> --- a/CODING_STYLE
> +++ b/CODING_STYLE
> @@ -44,7 +44,8 @@ Rationale:
>  3. Naming
>
>  Variables are lower_case_with_underscores; easy to type and read.  Structured
> -type names are in CamelCase; harder to type but standing out.  Scalar type
> +type names are in CamelCase; harder to type but standing out.  Enum type
> +names and function type names should also be in CamelCase.  Scalar type
>  names are lower_case_with_underscores_ending_with_a_t, like the POSIX
>  uint64_t and family.  Note that this last convention contradicts POSIX
>  and is therefore likely to be changed.
> --
> 1.7.1
>
>