On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Colin McCabe wrote: > > I pushed a patch to master that adds this. It's now > > > > struct ceph_mount_t; > > > > which is sort of annoying: the _t suffix really shouldn't be there. But > > if it's just ceph_mount it conflicts with int ceph_mount()... :/ > > > > sage > > > > > > Well, actually, in C and C++, variables can have the same name as > types. In other words, the namespaces are separate. Taking advantage > of this isn't necessarily a good idea, though... parsing in C++ is > pretty ambiguous already. In this case it's the function ceph_mount(). I'll make it struct ceph_mount_info and typdef ceph_mount_info_t I guess! sage > > As far as the _t suffix goes, it's used a lot in the Ceph library > bindings. For example, librados has rados_t, rados_ioctx_t, > rados_list_ctx_t, and rados_snap_t. librbd has rbd_snap_t and > rbd_image_t. So although we don't generally use the _t internally, the > library bindings are generally a _t party (so to speak.) > > cheers, > Colin > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > >
