Re: Dumb identifier name question



Oh, ok. I was using the 2.0.x line -- for some reason I thought RH 8.0
came with 2.1/2.2, but I see now I was mistaken.

Thanks,
Rachel

On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 17:06, Owen Taylor wrote:
> 
> Rachel Hestilow <hestilow ximian com> writes:
> 
> > As a related issue, what would you think of moving all function argument
> > names as declared in .h to their own namespace? I ask this because I'm
> > getting tired of seeing warning spew when I turn on -Wshadow (mostly
> > because of the libc "index" function).
> 
> Have you tried recently? Soeren Sandmann spent a bunch of time prior
> to 2.2 fixing conflicts with system headers with changes of the
> form s/index/index_/.
> 
> Regards,
>                                         Owen
> 
>  
> > Pros:
> >  1) Could be done with a perl script
> >  2) Won't incur any code changes, as it would it only be changing the
> > header prototypes, not the actual implementations.
> >  3) Gtk-doc, et al, should still work, since gtk-doc statements are in
> > sources, not headers.
> 
> [ 3) is not actually quite true - the names in the headers need to match 
>   the the gtk-doc comments, so changes were needed to the doc comments
>   as well. ]
> _______________________________________________
> gtk-devel-list mailing list
> gtk-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]