[openbeosnetteam] Re: question about coding style
- From: "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeosnetteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 20:55:19 +0200 CEST
Hi Oliver,
Oliver Tappe <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2006-07-25 at 16:08:30 [+0200], Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > Well, we're following the Be style too :)
> > C structures and methods are lower case with '_', while C++ classes
> > are
> > UpperCaseAndCombined. C structure members are lower case, too,
> > while C+
> > + members have the 'f' prefix.
> Ok. So would it be ok to change udp.cpp from the C-style to the C++-
> style? I
> mean udp_protocol is a C++ struct, although it inherits from a C-
> struct. A
> bit of a mixture, really.
> Would you object to me using UdpProtocol instead of udp_protocol (and
> of
> course then use the f-prefix for struct members)?
I would say these are corner cases in the style guide, and should be
used as preferred by the actual developer.
Now, I can just give you an insight into the logic I am following here,
maybe it appeals to you to, maybe not - see below :-)
> > > - method declarations should be lined up (with lots of space
> > > to the
> > > left)
> > Not sure what you mean here.
> I mean this:
1)
> struct udp_protocol : net_protocol {
> udp_protocol();
[...]
> };
>
> instead of that:
2)
> struct udp_protocol : net_protocol {
> udp_protocol();
[...]
> };
AFAICT there is no part in the style guide that would actually
advertize 1) over 2). In fact, I think that only 2) is specifically
mentioned, and we only came up with 1) because some developers
preferred this - and it's sometimes really clearer, too, IMO.
> > Yes, the OpenTracker style guide doesn't include the C case. When
> > you
> > look at the Be headers, the C naming style seems to be consistent,
> > but
> > also different from the C++ naming style.
> Yes, both are consistent, but we seem to be using C-style in .cpp
> files and
> that confuses me (network/stack/stack.cpp is an example).
Since you always have to deal with C-structures in C++ files, I am
following a logic to use either the C or C++ naming style in C++ files:
If the struct is a dumb struct with all of its members public, and no
real logic attached to it, I'm using the C style. If it has its own
logic that it hides from others, I'm using C++ style. However, I'm
naming methods always in the C++ style, which the few Be examples
(entry_ref, ...) don't do.
Bye,
Axel.
Other related posts:
