On Jan 6, 2010, at 1:04 PM, David Reiss wrote:
>> 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")?Sounds good. > >> 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. Cool. I've looked at the code generator and it looks like a fairly easy change. (Easier than the python post-processing script I was contemplating if the answer was "no way".) I'll see what I can come up with. - Rush
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
