From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Antipov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proposal: 'struct window' cleanup Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:08:18 +0400 Message-ID: <4FBB3B62.4070504@yandex.ru> References: <4FBA5060.7070702@yandex.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1337670387 26721 80.91.229.3 (22 May 2012 07:06:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 07:06:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 22 09:06:26 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SWjAn-00041A-VY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 09:06:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54566 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SWjAn-0002r5-Ah for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 03:06:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43521) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SWjAd-0002qQ-Pi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 03:06:23 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SWjAY-0002YV-R6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 03:06:15 -0400 Original-Received: from forward5.mail.yandex.net ([77.88.46.21]:44918) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SWjAY-0002V2-Cw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 03:06:10 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp4.mail.yandex.net (smtp4.mail.yandex.net [77.88.46.104]) by forward5.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 3A2C01201175; Tue, 22 May 2012 11:06:08 +0400 (MSK) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1337670368; bh=57pWlVVRymPwPqMyPec6yV0kM1elNBD4tFLxfapiQKE=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=B78mg4jRLrgJ6w/MiefQImRIuvuROKIHZBDRspyHurzYnMh70Q1TX5Xi44ZhlJo4O Euz7+OdXyHFrg1a80Ti+y16feDGFKzoBENwnGwHzX8EqP3nFCq1o8FKndCF8APxotZ WZ7sqks8m6QTKNbFIolUw37Rf/5Pj+t1mWRLQ0Y8= Original-Received: from smtp4.mail.yandex.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 191CE5C03A6; Tue, 22 May 2012 11:06:08 +0400 (MSK) Original-Received: from antipov.client.gelicon.ru (antipov.client.gelicon.ru [78.153.153.8]) by smtp4.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTP id 67xOaqtS-67xm6mZD; Tue, 22 May 2012 11:06:07 +0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1337670368; bh=57pWlVVRymPwPqMyPec6yV0kM1elNBD4tFLxfapiQKE=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject: References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=iov5UP8tsyYOI0eeXjPEamd+MVqOSs63a0H6sJ+qLN+haZyT+vF6hpmx36nPwgoiv ZwgzmbpAZ/gR4fDUskscsHGxuaj9MFwJYbDSkJB8qNnItTKx5Dk8ZlwDznJd/B6+iR yXf4oc8fJzAT1X/ziVTvXUtyeS+bpUi1SAjTI8TA= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 77.88.46.21 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:150600 Archived-At: On 05/22/2012 07:30 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: > I generally like the idea. But please don't use "_p" suffixes > for variables. The "p" stands for "predicate" and a predicate is a kind > of function, so that's not the right way to say that something is > a boolean value. OK, but what about other "struct window" bitfield members whose names ends with "_p"? Should we also rename it to obey this naming convention? Also this kind of patch proposes a lot of small and simple changes. Is there a convenient way to document them in ChangeLog? Dmitry