At 11:41 AM -0500 3/22/02, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>On Friday 22 March 2002 11:36, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> At 10:02 AM -0500 3/22/02, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>> >We're still all over the place with typedef name formats. We've FOO, Foo,
>> >and foo_t. We tried to hash this out before, but we didn't come to a
>clear
>> >consensus. (We got sidetracked by typedeffing pointers to typedefs.)
>>
>> All Parrot typedef'd things will be in lower case with a leading cap.
>> No data has a Parrot_ prefix--that's saved for the embedding and
>> extending headers. The sole exception is the PMC, and only because
>> that's an abbreviation so it's appropriate. That means Intval,
>> String, Encoding, and whatnot.
>>
>> I'm up in the air as to whether any of the core routines should have
>> a Parrot prefix--I'm thinking not, as I don't think any of them
>> should be exposed.
>> --
>
>Okay, I'll start cleaning up along with other types. It'll be incremental,
>so we'll be a mix for a while.
That's fine. Throw in typedefs for both ways to start, so we can do
this incrementally, if you would.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
