Re: Features/SourceLayout

Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 10:29 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> Alex Rousskov wrote:
>>>> The following page has been changed by Amos Jeffries:
>>>> http://wiki.squid-cache.org/Features/SourceLayout?action=diff&rev2=9&rev1=8
>>> Original:
>>>
>>>> Question: Can we remove Foo prefix from FOO/!FooSomething.h file
>>>> names? The prefix carries no additional information and is probably
>>>> not required for modern compilers, especially in C++ world.
>>>>
>>>> Answer: File name should match the primary class declared or defined
>>>> in that file. Directory name should match the namespace used by
>>>> classes in that directory. We should move from PROTOFoo to PROTO::Foo
>>>> classes.
>>> Added to Answer:
>>>
>>>> Some systemic problems have been found cleaning filenames like this
>>>> with compiler include methods.
>>> Amos,
>>>
>>> Please clarify what you meant. What systemic problems and with what
>>> kind of filenames? Is this about the case of "proto", the directory
>>> name? We have agreed that directories will use low_case, for Windows
>>> sake, right?
>>>
>> I was referring to the g++ "foo.h foo.h -I./src/Module -I./src" problem
>> Robert pointed out following that windows talk.
>> IMO the windows case-sensitivity can be worked around, but the -I
>> problem is a big one.
>
> Do you see a flaw in my response to that Robert's email? I have said
> that Robert's example will not be applicable to Squid sources: All
> module files will include using the "module/file.h" pattern and not the
> current "file.h" pattern. We are going to use -I src/ and never -I
> src/module/.
>
> I do not recall objections from Robert or others. Did I miss them? Are
> there any problems with that approach?

I missed that email from you.
I don't see any huge problems with that approach, as long as we make
sure its kept to.

Amos

-- 
Please use Squid 2.6STABLE17+ or 3.0STABLE1+
There are serious security advisories out on all earlier releases.