Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 20:30:14 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Kristof Provost <kp@FreeBSD.org> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, Marie Helene Kvello-Aune <marieheleneka@gmail.com>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r304815 - in head: lib lib/libifc share/examples/libifc share/mk Message-ID: <20160825203014.GB5517@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <1A050E0F-4B9F-420A-97C6-C203B92A5F3F@FreeBSD.org> References: <201608251940.u7PJePv3023083@repo.freebsd.org> <23395083.lPEyYQ7ZbW@ralph.baldwin.cx> <1A050E0F-4B9F-420A-97C6-C203B92A5F3F@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:20:29PM +0200, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 25 Aug 2016, at 22:14, John Baldwin wrote: > > I hate even writing this mail, and it looks like the topic wasn't > > really discussed in the review, but I think libifconfig is probably > > the "better" name if the goal is to move most of ifconfig into it. > > ... > > Hmm, it seems you are 'libifc_*'. Most of our libraries do not > > include 'lib' in the namespace prefix (see above examples that all > > use the name of the library without 'lib' as the prefix). If nothing > > else I'd suggest dropping 'lib' to be consistent with most other > > libraries in the tree. +1. > The name was in fact discussed privately, and we figured libifconfig > was a bit on the long side. Oh come one, we already have `libblocksruntime' and `libbluetooth' (and some others I probably don't remember now). `libifconfig' is just fine. Potential namespace clashes are a lot nastier than a longer name. > I certainly take your point about libifc_. Does anyone else have any > views regarding the naming (or other subjects)? I second John, dropping the `lib' prefix and going with `ifconfig_' looks like a good idea. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160825203014.GB5517>