Re: [PATCH] linuxabi

Ihar 'Philips' Filipau
2003-10-03T14:00:55Z

Andries Brouwer wrote:
>
> Possibly. So we need discussion.
>
> I have registered comment #1: Al prefers the enum style.
> A possibility.
>
> Now you come with comment #2: write LINUX_MS_RDONLY instead of
> MS_RDONLY. You have not convinced me.
>

My 0.02 euro.

LINUX_* - not right stuff. It makes a lot of sence to have the same
name for same thing, even in different contexts. Or you are going to
create a hell for some-one who may wish to make a documentation.

Headers are going to be used in different context (hopefully) so
would be no collisions (hopefully).

Another question does GCC have something like C++'s namespace for C?
That's would be good. Changing names - bad.

And #define LINUX_NS(x) doesn't make sound - you will lose ability to
grep over defines and [ce]tags will not work on this anymore. cpp is not
correct tool for namespace implementation.

--
Ihar 'Philips' Filipau / with best regards from Saarbruecken.
--
"... and for $64000 question, could you get yourself vaguely
familiar with the notion of on-topic posting?"
-- Al Viro @ LKML