Eric Lemings wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 2:50 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (STDCXX-563) split up rw/_mutex.h
...
Right. IMO, we should go with whichever of the approaches is better.
Which one in your opinion is it?
I would prefer not using directories to organize configuration-specific
files. If the configuration (cpu, os, compiler, whatever) is a part
of the filename, the file can be placed in any arbitrary directory (not
that it should be).
So if these files shouldn't be placed in arbitrary directories
(the only existing directory where could logically go right now
is include/rw) what is the benefit of encoding the platform in
their names? I'm not arguing for or against either approach (not
yet, despite the list below :) just trying to understand the
advantages. So far we have:
Advantages of platform directories:
* consistency: no risk of having individual files that deviate
from a naming convention established by the directories
* code organization: it's clear where to look for files specific
to each platform
* established practice: atomic sources under subdirectories of
src/, e.g., src/i86 or src/ia64, etc.
Disadvantages:
?
Advantages of encoding platform in file names:
* established practice: rw/_config-*.h headers, e.g.,
rw/_config-acc.h
Disadvantages:
* risk of naming inconsistencies when adding new files
Martin
If simpler, more generic filenames are needed,
create links to the configuration-specific files.
Brad.
