On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Philip Brown wrote: >> [....] >> IMHO, the names of functions and the file they are located in >> should be based on the functionality that they are providing, and >> should be grouped based on similar functionality and not based on >> similarities in portions of their names. > >I agree with that sentiment 100%. > >Which is why when I see the function in question, as providing a >DRI-specific function that does not *exist* if DRI is not compiled in, >it seems straightforward to me that as such, it should have a >DRI-oriented name, and belongs in radeon_dri.c
With several people in disagreement with you though, I guess it might be a decision perhaps that should fall more into the lap of the driver maintainer or project lead or somesuch. -- Mike A. Harris ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris OS Systems Engineer - XFree86 maintainer - Red Hat ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
