Date: Tue, 28 Mar 1995 02:23:10 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: CVS-commiters@time.cdrom.com, cvs-lib@time.cdrom.com, jkh@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/stdlib strhash.c Message-ID: <6298.796386190@freefall.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 28 Mar 95 20:05:49 %2B1000." <199503281005.UAA18620@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> You never needed to rename hash() to _hash(). It is static so it doesn't > contribute to namespace pollution. Adding a leading underscore just moves > it into the implementation's namespace and might cause problems if the Well, then we have a problem because the friggin' thing DOES clash when you try to link anything with it otherwise! :-( :-( Give it a try. Perhaps Nate should look into this too, since it's possibly something suspicious with the new ld stuff. > be distinguished from names in the `barhash' module by prefixing them with > `foo'. `strhash' is a bad name for a module because names starting with > `str' are reserved. Well, again, I was just trying to avoid clashing with the existing hash stuff. I'd be more than happy to rename it to hash.c, but when I had it that way originally it clashed with db/hash.c's include of hash.h and I didn't want to rename the header and not the implementation file - that would have been even more confusing. I'll concur that the name strhash was rather deeply uninspired, but I didn't expect the clash in the first place and when it happened I was rather desperate to fix things again quickly. Suggestions? Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6298.796386190>