On 28/06/11 12:26, Dan McGee wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Allan McRae<allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
Rename alpm_mountpoint_t to pmmountpoint_t to keep naming consistent with every other struct we have.
What if I said "f*** it, it's 4.0, we should fix them all to be alpm_ like they should have always been"? I'm tempted to actually go the other way- this one doesnt matter so much since it is internal to the library, but we are very inconsistent with exposing PM_, pmxxx_t, etc. when all our functions are rightly named alpm_*().
Thoughts?
My thoughts are that I am glad I stopped writing my GTK3 libalpm frontend when I realised what was happening to the API! :D I am actually quite comfortable with the distinction that alpm_* is a function and pm*_t is a type. But saying that, converting the pmxxx_t to alpm_xxx_t does seem an overall more consistent approach. Our list type is already prefixed alpm_ and now we have exposed a lot more of those structs it is probably worth changing them. And now is the best time to do this. So lets say I am more in favor of doing this than not (yay for committed answers!). I would be quite happy to prepare the patchset to do it. Allan