[PATCH 1/3] dmloader: COM cleanup of IDirectMusicLoader object.

[Christian Costa]

2012/11/8 Henri Verbeet <hverbeet at gmail.com>

> On 8 November 2012 00:22, Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani at redhat.com> wrote:
> > But using just the capitalized letters from the name of the COM class as
> > a prefix and skipping the "Impl" would be in hindsight the better
> > standard. There are still 170+ COM interfaces to clean up which is a
> > sizable number regardless of it being just 13% of the total interface
> > implementations, so we could still change the standard, especially as
> > the existing function/method naming standard is not strictly enforced; I
> > didn't bother changing "offenders" if the name was reasonable.
> > But I'm deferring this decision to Jacek / Alexandre as they are the
> > drivers of the COM standardization in Wine. I don't mind too much as I
> > can work with both patterns.
> >
> I think the only reasonable naming convention is to name things after
> the implementation structure. In this case that would still end up
> being "IDirectMusicLoaderImpl_...", but for a slightly different
> reason. Where I agree with Nikolay is that "dmloader" would be a much
> nicer name than "IDirectMusicLoaderImpl" for the implementation
> structure as well, in which case you would also end up with
> "dmloader_..." for method implementations.
>

dmloader_IDirectMusicLoader_Method or dmloader_Method?
I was just saying removing the interface name was not a good thing imo or
am I missing something?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20121108/a8d46a59/attachment.html>