Re: [AD] explicit prefixes on structure field names

[Elias Pschernig <elias@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2006-12-15 at 02:17 +1100, Peter Wang wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> In another project I work with there are prefixes on structure field
> names, which are different for each structure type.  I find this greatly
> helps when reading code because you instantly know which structure the
> field is part of.  It also helps with ctags and grep.  Would we be
> willing to adopt this convention for 4.3 code?

I vote weakly no.

> Attached is an example against Elias's xdummy branch.  For example, all
> AL_SYSTEM_INTERFACE fields might begin with "sysif_".  I think the
> benefit is quite clear, for example, in the line:
> 
> -    active = driver->initialize(0);
> +    active = driver->sysif_initialize(0);
> 

Yes, the benefit is clear. But to me, also the disadvantage. What if we
end up with something like:

active = sysinf->sysinf_initialize(0);

It just looks more unreadable to me than needed.

-- 
Elias Pschernig