On Monday 09 February 2015 14:07:31 Jon A. Cruz wrote:
> From some of my experience, using
>
> #include "iotivity/ocstack.h"
> #include "iotivity/Api.h"
>
> is better than
>
> #include "iotivity/ocstack.h"
> #include "iotivity/OCApi.h"
>
>
> It can help with setting up different libraries with minimal -I
> complexity. It also helps proof against filename collisions when
> developers use other libraries in addition to IoTivity.
Agreed and much preferred this way.
But the questions remain: what is the template for
a) the C lite API
b) the C++ connectivity & discovery API
c) a specific service
Suggestions:
a)
1) #include <iotvt/foo.h>
2) #include <iotivity/foo.h>
3) #include <iotivity-lite/foo.h>
b)
1) #include <iotivity/foo.h>
2) #include <iotivity/Foo.h>
3) #include <iotivity/Foo>
c)
1) #include <iotivity/home.h>
2) #include <iotivity/home/home.h>
My preferences, in decreasing order:
a1 + b1 + c2
a1 + b2 + c2
a2 + b3 + c2
a1 + b2 + c2
I recommend against the <iotivity/lowercase.h> pattern being used in more than
one category, especially the a2 + b1 combination.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
