[LinuxBIOS] #41: Re: #40: Decide on common header #ifndef names or standards for usage
LinuxBIOS
svn at openbios.org
Wed Nov 22 01:25:29 CET 2006
#41: Re: [LinuxBIOS] #40: Decide on common header #ifndef names or standards for
usage
--------------------------------------------------------+-------------------
Reporter: Stefan Reinauer <stepan at coresystems.de> | Owner: somebody
Type: defect | Status: closed
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: code | Version: v2
Resolution: duplicate | Keywords:
Dependencies: #40 | Patchstatus: there is no patch
--------------------------------------------------------+-------------------
Changes (by stepan):
* status: new => closed
* dependencies: => #40
* resolution: => duplicate
Old description:
> I think I've mostly been using these:
>
> > __FOO_H__
>
> these are used by glibc and Linux:
>
> _PATH_TO_FOO_H
>
> Maybe we want to use those?
>
> which ones have we been using most? (Smallest change commandment)
>
> > Is there a special convention or agreement on when to use which? If
> yes,
> > it should be documented. If no, we should standardize on one format
> and
> > use it consistently.
>
> Lets make a standard now and use it. It should go to the Coding
> Guide Lines
>
> Stefan
New description:
I think I've mostly been using these:
> __FOO_H__
these are used by glibc and Linux:
_PATH_TO_FOO_H
Maybe we want to use those?
which ones have we been using most? (Smallest change commandment)
> Is there a special convention or agreement on when to use which? If
yes,
> it should be documented. If no, we should standardize on one format and
> use it consistently.
Lets make a standard now and use it. It should go to the Coding
Guide Lines
Stefan
Comment:
this is a duplicate of #40. closing it
--
Ticket URL: <http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/41#comment:1>
LinuxBIOS <http://www.linuxbios.org/>
More information about the coreboot
mailing list