Brian Aker wrote: > Hi! > > I saw this gem from Mats today: > > "I would prefer if we never used typedef to introduce aliases for > struct/class/union, they cause more problem that it's worth, and they > are not > needed in C++ at all." > > We should do this as well. There are only a few places where we should > be using typedef at this point, and even in those few cases I still > wonder if we should be (mainly I think of ha_rows).
Totally agree. I've been removing these as I find them. It would be good if they are policy. Also, there is no need to reference "struct foo" anywhere in the code than the definition. A few of the other typedefs I think aren't as terrible - although I'm not a fan of ha_rows... Monty _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
