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

[Christian Costa]

2012/11/8 Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani at redhat.com>

> On 11/08/2012 01:13 PM, Christian Costa wrote:
> >
> >
> > 2012/11/8 Henri Verbeet <hverbeet at gmail.com <mailto:hverbeet at gmail.com>>
> >
> >     On 8 November 2012 00:22, Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani at redhat.com
> >     <mailto: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?
> dmloader_IDirectMusicLoader_Method
>

Henri said the other. It seems there is no consensus. ;)

>
> > I was just saying removing the interface name was not a good thing imo
> > or am I missing something?
> Right, the interface name needs to be there as it matches the COBJMACROS
> name. Basically the C macro with a prefix.
>

It is what I was thinking. Match the macros and just add a class prefix if
needed
or just _ to avoid the conflict.

Christian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20121108/695229f1/attachment-0001.html>