Re: minor pollution

["Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>]

>> > I kinda like the idea of globals being named to identify them as such.
>> 
>> I didn't think he was suggesting getting rid of the g_, just making it
>> namespace protected by adding an ap_ in front of it.  But, I could be
>> wrong of course.
>
>Speaking as the g_ perpetrator, I would say you add the ap_ after, not
>before. i.e. g_ap_bDebugHooks.

That would be very odd.  The only reason we are using ap_ is to protect
the name as part of our global symbol space.  ap_ therefore means global.

....Roy

Re: minor pollution

[Ben Laurie <be...@algroup.co.uk>]

"Roy T. Fielding" wrote:
> 
> >> > I kinda like the idea of globals being named to identify them as such.
> >>
> >> I didn't think he was suggesting getting rid of the g_, just making it
> >> namespace protected by adding an ap_ in front of it.  But, I could be
> >> wrong of course.
> >
> >Speaking as the g_ perpetrator, I would say you add the ap_ after, not
> >before. i.e. g_ap_bDebugHooks.
> 
> That would be very odd.  The only reason we are using ap_ is to protect
> the name as part of our global symbol space.  ap_ therefore means global.

:-) Good point!

Cheers,

Ben.

--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html