On 17 October 2015 at 00:25, Kurt Schwehr <[email protected]> wrote: > I personally like foo_, but m_ is fine.
I personally too, but we should stick to what has already been used in GDAL. > I worry about unexpected side > effects of changing member naming with private members. I don't suggest changing members visibility. > If we go for changing > publics, we should pick a time and go for a major version number bump and > expect a lot of peopIe using GDAL to go through a lot of pain. I see a lot > of stuff generally like this... > ... Public members should stay as they are, not renamed. That is also Even's suggestion. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
