From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59383) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gKFkG-0002Ky-Mi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Nov 2018 23:47:13 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gKFk8-0007BU-Bi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Nov 2018 23:47:08 -0500 Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 15:46:35 +1100 From: David Gibson Message-ID: <20181107044635.GE5575@umbus.fritz.box> References: <153933509870.3834759.13291133122604475240.stgit@bahia.lan> <153933511983.3834759.10815543413375425072.stgit@bahia.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sfyO1m2EN8ZOtJL6" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] spapr_pci: rename some structured types List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexey Kardashevskiy Cc: Greg Kurz , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= --sfyO1m2EN8ZOtJL6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 12:49:53PM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 12/10/2018 20:05, Greg Kurz wrote: > > According to CODING_STYLE, structured types names are expected to be > > in CamelCase but we have: > >=20 > > typedef struct spapr_pci_msi { > > uint32_t first_irq; > > uint32_t num; > > } spapr_pci_msi; > >=20 > > typedef struct spapr_pci_msi_mig { > > uint32_t key; > > spapr_pci_msi value; > > } spapr_pci_msi_mig; > >=20 > > Acronyms are often written in upper-case, but here we would en up with > > a lot of upper-case letters in a row (ie, sPAPRPCIMSI) which defeats the > > purpose of CamelCase. It even displays "RPC" which looks awkward. >=20 > Yet more common than this. I vote for sPAPRPCIMSI as PCI is an acronym. > "pci" is small letters hurts my eyes :) Hrm. So, yes, I know I kind of started it, but these various compromises about how to captialize things means this patch is now "change from non-camelcase to.. something that's also not really camelcase". At which point I'm not particularly convinced it's worth the bother. If we really want to go ahead with CamelCasing this, I think we'd need to start by fixing up the existing sorta-camelcase-but-not-really stuff to actual camelcase. Which would mean the slightly odd reading "Spapr" and "Pci" and "Msi" and so forth, but it might be worth it for consistency. --=20 David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson --sfyO1m2EN8ZOtJL6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEdfRlhq5hpmzETofcbDjKyiDZs5IFAlvibioACgkQbDjKyiDZ s5KY/BAAktrzJIRvnQRTKKq9J0tT3rMQ0Slb8FRvBEXQ4AmGhcCn4Mz1WG7e8sgk PC/GMPdem9iJf4AIUiJ+2J/MCpZ18JIf2rgiSudB3ItMnIppBUZG4mmCIPSsrKcL e5A3Ps0DSV84vncywRp8KYP7eBKv4Jb3j7PTLej2CigdxSCTpfs7YK1g15XzE42B +njgWo7EWPF4ij6dmK5TkDscFPhJtqkx5i6p16RjQJWkU1tK8wItTd3r0Q2CC7DH Zidgp8M1kUDJ/AxaCQffR2f7A5eZhskqirh0VjD+0pcf3xeyZ7c/hx/bcCMxV63a 7LatJkZb8Dv9kuBNTHsTJGzCk87feVkgTVTWWF1Z5207y8Xm9f0ratsJTeuHd4MU iyrmx4GLQ5rp1JTWcqhgPjWt31PE16suQiSsa5q0kApRXOepS6q/YrTqoTixSBMq brS4eoknUPEhNgrVRrJ9YhIPI1nRUFA4LsYNfxPe/Ko7ED/QqX2EGZoYEOB6WcqB PLq/PYMoZYVIqbujx91XSvBKVHnchkF/9AWt6N6ZHyvrskR6VLdUFRh2aWnvI9ox z9uFPbpr+5TIl/s8cf/4mWR996Tgs72U/0yrDLSX+xCVI38FAD0iNw0z2E89gbhh jwa3ZTJmEs9RJmqPL8VYMfnv05wo1llHNk07IJ1zeJqDREcY4Ko= =O9Rf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sfyO1m2EN8ZOtJL6--