Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 08:59:47AM +0300, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
Where did this lcl_ convention come from?

http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer_Code_Conventions#free_functions_and_methods

The lcl_ prefix has no meaning to a compiler or linker. If the intent is to
make such functions file-local, why not use the static keyword, or an
anonymous namespace instead, so that they actually *are* local also to the
tool-chain? (You can still keep the lcl_ prefix if you love it.)

Yes, those functions should be anonymous and static. When I write that page
above back in the days, I was just documenting what was there (hoping it would
improve consistancy), in this case I am not finding that convention to have a
deep purpose(*), though it might help some for tools like simple code-completion
or doxygen-style docs ...

Best,

Bjoern

(*) So its mostly: "any color you like as long as it's black".

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.