Re: [PATCH] Removing nested functions, part one of lots

[Colin Watson]

On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 12:05:04AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 01:37:38AM +0400, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> > В Tue, 1 Jan 2013 14:42:04 +0000
> > Colin Watson <address@hidden> пишет:
> > >  * If a hook requires more than one local variable from its parent
> > >    function, declare "struct <name-of-parent>_ctx" with the necessary
> > >    variables, and convert both the hook and the parent to access the
> > >    variables in question via that structure.
> > 
> > Personally I find "ctx" part a bit confusing. It is not really execution
> > context in usual sense, it is just collection of random variables. I
> > would rather go with "struct <name-of-parent>_data" here.
> 
> I'm fine with that (and this is exactly why I posted this for a bit of a
> bikeshedding opportunity :-) ).  Vladimir, any opinions on the naming?

Actually, "*_data" is suboptimal because (particularly in filesystem
code) there are many other variables and types called "data".  How about
"*_vars"?  Then I can use "struct foo_vars *vars = data;" or similar as
well and it should work out reasonably well.

-- 
Colin Watson                                       address@hidden