On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 03:32:44PM +0000, seventh guardian wrote: > On 2/9/06, Dominik Vogt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 02:05:14PM +0000, seventh guardian wrote: > > I've committed the patch to CVS (and removed the FARGS macro from > > FvwmConsole). For further patches, please always add a list of > > modified functions to the ChangeLog after the name of the .c file. > > This simplifies maintenance enormously. > > > > Here goes a second patch. > > I've added the list of modified functions after the file name, except > for the main function. I followed the style of some of your entries in > the changelogs, hope I've done it ok.
Actually, its not my personal style but what xemacs (and emacs?) generate when you move the cursor into a function and the press ctrl-x 4 a. (Unfortunately more recent versions of xemacs changed the style of the function list which makes it more difficult to grep through it. > As you said once, the command line syntax isn't going to change that > much, even for 3.0. But even so, some coding styles make it difficult > to use properly the ParseModuleArgs (or functions alike) regarding the > module aliases. I wonder if there could be fixed a standard for > aliases. I mean a true standard that modules using aliases should > follow. The argv[6] rule would be ok, but it would break some config > files. Obviosly some kind of wrapper could be used to avoid those > breakings, like in FvwmRearrange. I wonder what you think about this. The one problem with that approach is that such a change would break all third-party modules. > Without a proper standard, some modules using ParseModuleArgs won't be > as clean as they should be. I'm skipping them for now, wainting for a > definite solution. Ciao Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Dominik Vogt, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
