On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:29:45AM +0300, Tor Lillqvist <tml@iki.fi> wrote:
But how is the fact that you see that some lcl_Function is "local"
make it easier to understand what the function does? Isn't it only
unnecessary visual fluff?
Example: if it's lcl_Foo(), I just search in the local file. If it's a
method, I use ctags to look up the function definition.
Anyway, my main point was not that we should drop the "lcl_" prefix,
but that we should make these functions *actually* local, also for the
tool-chain, i.e. either static or in anonymous namespaces.
Agreed, if Lubos' compiler plugin could check for lcl_ functions that
are not static / in an anon namespace, that would be great, I guess. :-)
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.