Re: [PATCH]document the exception to a 'private function naming rule'
I'm of the opinion that the "svn_" prefix should still be removed.
I'd rather see the source file adjusted than the rules here.
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Kamesh Jayachandran wrote:
> Document the exceptions to the rule that functions private to a file
> should not start with 'svn_' prefix.
> * www/hacking.html
> Document the exception to naming the 'private to a file only' functions.
> Index: www/hacking.html
> --- www/hacking.html (revision 21583)
> +++ www/hacking.html (working copy)
> @@ -662,7 +662,14 @@
> svn_wc__ensure_directory). All declarations private to a single file
> (such as the static function get_entry_url inside
> libsvn_wc/update_editor.c) do not require any additional namespace
> - decorations. Symbols that need to be used outside a library, but
> + decorations. However there could be exceptions when the local(static)
> + function name identify some operation over the
> + data type(prefixed by 'svn'), then we may inadvertently pollute the
> + namespace with local functions even though we did not intend it
> + (such as subversion/libsvn_diff/token.c's
> + static function svn_diff__tree_insert_token,
> + this function operates over svn_diff__tree struct).
> + Symbols that need to be used outside a library, but
> still are not public are put in a public header, but use the
> double underscore notation. Such symbols may be used by
> Subversion core code only, and we try to be restrictive
Received on Thu Sep 21 19:22:14 2006
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev