Re: libgda++

[rodrigo linuxave net]

Laurent Marzullo wrote:

> >
> >I don't think this is the best way to do it. The fact is that all C header
> >files SHOULD include the "#if defined __cplusplus" stuff, to allow C++
> >programs to use the library. I mean, I don't think there will be too many C++
> >programs using the C lib when your C++ wrapper is done, but to be correct,
> >the C header files muts include. So, please, tell me which files are missing
> >this and I'll add it.
>
>          Ok, Il will send you a list of all the c include file.
>
> >we don't follow any comment convention, but to be similar with the rest, just
> >use old C comments (/* */), although I think you can use whichever you want,
> >since this is C++ and not C.
>
>          And to generate the doc ? Do you write it by hand ? Or do you use
>          tools as Doxygen ?
>

oops sorry, I didn't understand what you meant. Yes, we use gtk-doc comments. That
is:

/**
 * gda_connection_open
 * @dsn: connection string
 * @user: user name
 * @password: password
 *
 * This function opens the given connection......
 */
gint
gda_connection_open (..............)
{
}

>
> >I would really prefer ++, but if it's really true that it will cause problems
> >(is that true?)....
>
>          I don't really know about such problem. '+' is a valid character for
>          a file name ... so, I don't know which kind of problem this will
> bring.
>          But we can keept libgdamm-client, libgdamm-common and libgdamm-server.
>

ok, so + is a valid character, so what was said about this? I don't remember...
well, anyway, please call them as you want, but follow the same conventions:

libgda-clientmm (not libgdamm-client)
libgda-commonmm (not libgdamm-common)
libgda-servermm (not libgdamm-server)

cheers