On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 04:41:55AM -0400, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Hi > > ----- Original Message ----- > > On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 04:31:20AM -0400, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 12:55:38AM +0400, marcandre.lureau@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > wrote: > > > > > From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > Use shorter line, use the common "d" variable for private data access, > > > > > add brackets to ease reading the inner block vs the condition, remove > > > > > needless != NULL. > > > > > > > > I'd lean towards NACK for this one, one letter variable names is imo > > > > very bad for readability. I know this is widespread in the spice-gtk > > > > codebase, but I'd at least rather not expand that usage. > > > > > > > > > > You may rename it "priv", but then you lost the benefit of being really > > > short. > > > > Being really short is a benefit? This is where we are going to disagree :) > > Well, in an proper OO language, you wouldn't even have it, it would be like magic! Maybe, maybe not, 'priv' members in C++ classes are not that unusual ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opaque_pointer#C.2B.2B ) > So yes, I like private member being accessed with a very short > variable in C. If it's use consistently, there is very little > confusion possible imho. As I said, we are not going to agree there :) "If it's used consistently, it does not cause confusion", does not mean that's a good thing :) This just makes things harder to read for someone not knowing the convention, and for no great reason (saving at most a few seconds of typing?) Christophe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel