On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I think Perl_ and maybe Perl__ would be fine. I'd rather Perl_ and _Perl_,
but...
How about PerlF_ and PerlD_ (for Functions and Data)?
To also specify Exported and Private we could have PerlFE_,
PerlFP, etc.
Okay, I think we're talking at cross-purposes at the moment.
There are exactly 6 things that need prefixes added:
1) Functions that are explicitly exported as part of the API
2) Functions that are internal only, but we can't stop being exported
because lots of linkers suck
3) Global data that
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 04:05:05PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Okay, I think we're talking at cross-purposes at the moment.
There are exactly 6 things that need prefixes added:
1) Functions that are explicitly exported as part of the API
2) Functions that are internal only, but we can't
"NC" == Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
NC Presumably there are internal functions that aren't part of the
NC public API, but because they are used in more than 1 source file
NC do need external linkage. Or were your "linkers are dead-stupid"
NC words meaning that we can't
At 10:24 PM 4/13/2001 +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 04:05:05PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Okay, I think we're talking at cross-purposes at the moment.
There are exactly 6 things that need prefixes added:
1) Functions that are explicitly exported as part of the API
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) wrote on 11.04.01 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
*) All private routines have #defines to give them a _Perl_ prefix
*) All private data have #defines to give them a _PL_ prefix
IIRC, ISO C says you cannot have /^_[A-Z_][A-Za-z_0-9]*$/. That's reserved
for the
At 12:16 AM 4/13/2001 +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) wrote on 11.04.01 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
*) All private routines have #defines to give them a _Perl_ prefix
*) All private data have #defines to give them a _PL_ prefix
IIRC, ISO C says you cannot have
Dan Sugalski wrote on 4/11/01 13.38:
At 03:09 PM 4/11/2001
-0400, John Siracusa wrote:
On 4/11/01 10:55 AM, Dan
Sugalski wrote:
It does fix the link issues,
though. perl6.so won't ever
have an
unqualified function in
it--they'll all have either a
Perl_ or _Perl_
prefix on them, and all
IIRC, ISO C says you cannot have /^_[A-Z_][A-Za-z_0-9]*$/. That's reserved
for the standard.
If you consider our prefix is "_Perl_" not just "_", we will be pretty safe.
There are just not many people follow the standard anyway :-)
Hong
I'm in the middle of drafting the PDD on coding conventions,
and in the bit on naming things, I've run into the Perl 5 stuff
that does
#define foo Perl_foo
etc.
Its not clear to me whether this is for backwards compatibility or for
convenience (or for something even more fiendish related to
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
*) All exported perl functions and functionlike things have a Perl_ prefix
*) All exported data and dataish thigns have a PL_ prefix
*) All private routines have #defines to give them a _Perl_ prefix
*) All private data have #defines to give them a
Okay, I *really* may have missed something
Do you mean this:
/* Allow us to refer to _Perl_foo() as just foo() inside */
#define _Perl_foo foo
or this:
/* We're foo(), other folks can call us _Perl_foo() */
#define foo _Perl_foo
The second is what I read from your list, although the
At 11:00 AM 4/11/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
Okay, I *really* may have missed something
Do you mean this:
/* Allow us to refer to _Perl_foo() as just foo() inside */
#define _Perl_foo foo
or this:
/* We're foo(), other folks can call us _Perl_foo() */
#define foo _Perl_foo
The
On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 04:38:21PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 03:09 PM 4/11/2001 -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
On 4/11/01 10:55 AM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
It does fix the link issues, though. perl6.so won't ever have an
unqualified function in it--they'll all have either a Perl_ or _Perl_
On 4/11/01 4:38 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 03:09 PM 4/11/2001 -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
On 4/11/01 10:55 AM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
It does fix the link issues, though. perl6.so won't ever have an
unqualified function in it--they'll all have either a Perl_ or _Perl_
prefix on them, and all
At 03:47 PM 4/11/2001 -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 04:38:21PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 03:09 PM 4/11/2001 -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
On 4/11/01 10:55 AM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
It does fix the link issues, though. perl6.so won't ever have an
unqualified
16 matches
Mail list logo
