On Monday 2007 July 09, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 10:39:41PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Are _identifiers with leading underscore Kosher thing to do, I > > wonder... We do have ones with trailing ones (mostly qsort > > functions) and I think they are done that way for the sake of > > standards conformance. > > _[a-z]* is kosher for file scopes or function scoping: Perhaps I'm reading it wrong but: "All identifiers beginning with an underscore are reserved for ordinary identifiers (functions, variables, typedefs, enumeration constants) with file scope." Doesn't agree with what you've said. I think that you _can_ use _[a-z]* for labels or structure members - however, not within file or function scope. However, the rule of thumb I've always used is "don't start identifiers with underscore". I can't think of a situation that would mean you have to use an underscore to start an identifier - so why get into detailed worries about where it's allowed and where it isn't. Just don't use it. The document you linked to gives exactly this advice: "Don't give anything a name with a leading underscore." > P.S. Note that the Linux kernel does not worry about such rules; in > particular, _[a-z]* is very commonly used at the global scope level, > without any problems. It doesn't have to be as portable as git > probably needs to be, however. The kernel doesn't use any standard library so there is nothing for it to conflict with. I don't think it's that the kernel doesn't worry about those rules, it's that those rules don't apply (just as they don't for glibc). The underscore rules aren't a limitation of the language, they are a limitation imposed by the standard library. Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIET andyparkins@xxxxxxxxx - 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
