Re: [PATCH] linuxabi

[Ihar 'Philips' Filipau]

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

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/