On Friday 22 March 2002 10:07, Brent Dax wrote: > Bryan C. Warnock: > # We're still all over the place with typedef name formats. > # We've FOO, Foo, > # and foo_t. We tried to hash this out before, but we didn't > # come to a clear > # consensus. (We got sidetracked by typedeffing pointers to typedefs.) > # > # What's it going to be? > > Parrot_Foo for external names, FOO for internal names, struct > parrot_foo_t for struct names. Now let's argue about if Parrot_Foo is > typedefed as a pointer or not. ;^)
Oy vay!, none of which match PDD 07. Shall we add parrot_foo_e for enums? (Which I'd actually like to do, if we're going to be that varied.) Is Parrot_Foo strictly for external use - ie, there shouldn't be any use within the core? -- Bryan C. Warnock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
