Fwd: Re: [AD] Custom packfiles

[Dustin Dettmer <dustin@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> Peter Wang wrote:
> I only put in the prefix because getc and putc from
> stdio.h can be 
> macros and cause problems (which they did).  It's
> also recommended 
> practice in some standard to put prefixes on
> structure member names, for 
> exactly this reason (e.g. that's why they have
> struct timeval { tv_sec, 
> tv_usec }, and struct dirent { d_name, d_type },
> etc.) -- not that 
> anybody can be bothered most of the time.

Is Allegro C99?  If I understand the overloading
problem correctly, it could potientialy be solved via
variable macro arguments.  Although I may not be
understand the problem correctly, could you elaborate
on it?

In my opinion, overloading is a cleaner way to go,
user code wise.  Too many al_ _ex and _pf clutter up
said user code.  Isn't the purpose of the other _ pre
and suffixex to seperate functions that would be named
the same but act differently?

Anyway, those are my thoughts and reasons for
prefering function overloading to cluttering up their names.