On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 11:40 PM TheGag96 via Digitalmars-d-announce <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sunday, 20 October 2019 at 20:31:04 UTC, Johan wrote: > > (snip) > > Awesome, I just might try to get LDC working with this... > > ... > ...in order to fit the D naming style, since the semantics for > the enum was changing anyway. But of course, every struct must > keep its old name... Is this alright? Should I add aliases for > every struct for a better naming style, or maybe go back on my > decision before, or...?
If it is binding you should probably let it same as original code. I always try to make bindings as same as possible. It is much easier port existing code in original language. If I want to change interface or anything I made a new wrapper around that binding
