You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
You can find many such typedefs throughout picom, which is probably a bad idea. Because these names are reserved by POSIX
Simply dropping the _t suffix is not a good idea either, because it's difficult to tell what a name is, for example:
image_handle *a;
This could be "multiple variable image_handle with variable a, throw away the result", or "define variable a with type image_handle*". And it's also possible to have the same name to be either a type or a variable in different parts of the codebase.
So we must come up with a naming scheme so that typedefs and variables are named differently. I would suggest CamelCase. (structs, enums are not affected by this since they aren't ambiguous).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
You can find many such
typedef
s throughout picom, which is probably a bad idea. Because these names are reserved by POSIXSimply dropping the
_t
suffix is not a good idea either, because it's difficult to tell what a name is, for example:This could be "multiple variable
image_handle
with variablea
, throw away the result", or "define variablea
with typeimage_handle*
". And it's also possible to have the same name to be either a type or a variable in different parts of the codebase.So we must come up with a naming scheme so that typedefs and variables are named differently. I would suggest CamelCase. (
struct
s,enum
s are not affected by this since they aren't ambiguous).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: