On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, Alan Hourihane wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 04:19:21PM -0800, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
> > The current XAA has functions starting with "XAA" and header files
> > starting with "xaa". To avoid namespace pollution, the second
> > implementation of XAA will need a different namespace. It seems
> > good to avoid calling it anything with a '2' in the name. I'm
> > leaning towards "Xaa" for the functions and header files. Any
> > concerns?
>
> So, based on the case problem...
>
> I'd go with Xaa_Line.c instead of the current xaaLine.c and you can
> still use Xaa....() for the functions.
We don't care what the filenames are except for the header files.
The only reason why we care about header files is that a driver
might include support for both and may need both include paths.
There's only one exported header file. I'd like to name it Xaa.h
to match the namespace. Is it really going to be relevant on
case-unaware systems? Which ones are those BTW?
Mark.
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
