I agree there should be a naming convention. I don't care which one is picked, but picking one is good, and I agree it's good to avoid confusion between C and C++ header files.
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mats Wichmann Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 11:43 AM To: IoTivity Developer List <[email protected]> Subject: [dev] coding conventions: header file naming? is there any point to setting up a naming convention for C++ header files? currently we have a few that are named .hpp (the convention I gather was proposed by the Boost folks), and a bunch named .h. that makes it seem like it's just the whim of the programmer which to use. In some cases it's vaguely confusing: we have rd_client.h which is for everyone and RDClient.h which is just for c++, and which includes rd_client.h. -- mats P.S. this is the list that does use .hpp at the moment: resource/oc_logger/include/oc_log_stream.hpp resource/oc_logger/include/oc_logger.hpp resource/oc_logger/include/oc_log.hpp resource/include/OCProvisioningManager.hpp resource/include/OCCloudProvisioning.hpp service/easy-setup/mediator/richsdk/inc/EasySetup.hpp _______________________________________________ iotivity-dev mailing list [email protected] https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.iotivity.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fiotivity-dev&data=04%7C01%7Cdthaler%40microsoft.com%7C35f163bdca9e4919522508d57d512fa7%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636552710036118952%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwifQ%3D%3D%7C-1&sdata=u17vNozCW%2Bjxi78nQLjxgPpDX%2BA4DyPfMk0WBqfz6pA%3D&reserved=0 _______________________________________________ iotivity-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.iotivity.org/mailman/listinfo/iotivity-dev
