> typedef struct foo__isset {
> As far as I can tell, this has no effect on any of the code. It does
> pollute the namespace a little bit, but it seems acceptable to me.
I've been trying to guide all new namespace pollutions to use leading
underscores. That way we can disallow leading underscores in Thrift
identifiers and all pollutions will be safe, so maybe ("_foo__isset")?
> Would making a change like this, possibly dependent on a compiler
> command line flag, be acceptable to the developer community? Or is
> using SWIG on Thrift objects just abhorrent?
Fine with me. It's probably not necessary to make it a compiler option.
If it breaks, we can always revert and make it so.
--David
