Re: [PATCH v2 14/19] tree-diff: rework diff_tree interface to be sha1 based

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Kirill Smelkov <kirr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:46:32AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Kirill Smelkov <kirr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> 
>> > What are the downsides of "__" prefix by the way?
>> 
>> Aren't these names reserved for compiler/runtime implementations?
>
> Yes, but there are precedents when people don't obey it widely and
> in practice everything works :)

I think you are alluding to the practice in the Linux kernel, but
their requirement is vastly different---their product do not even
link with libc and they always compile with specific selected
versions of gcc, no?

> Let it be something portable anyway -
> how about diff_tree_sha1_low() ?

Sure.

As this is a file-scope static, I do not think the exact naming
matters that much.  Just FYI, we seem to use ll_ prefix (standing
for low-level) in some places.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]