2008/10/20, Sebastien LELONG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > IIUC, if we change and improve the JSG, by using <device_class>, defining > <function> and giving examples, would you agree on the current naming > convention currently described in it ?... > > Seb I think I agree, but it leaves one issue unaddressed:
Variables, constants, procedures and functions must be named as: - *<device>_<whatever>* if you want to avoid namespace collision - *<function>_<whatever>* if you want to have a common API What are the guidelines for choosing between them? If we don't decide on this, we'll have to discuss each individual case if we give priority to support of multiple libraries of the same device_group or to support common higher level libraries. Joep --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
