From: Ken Raeburn <raeburn@raeburn.org>
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: abstracting Lisp strings - macro name convention?
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 22:09:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <tx1u1nhwojn.fsf@raeburn.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200207020737.g627bR501067@aztec.santafe.edu> (Richard Stallman's message of "Tue, 2 Jul 2002 01:37:27 -0600 (MDT)")
Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
> SMBP is too terse. That won't be used so often
> that we cannot afford a longer and more meaningful name.
Okay, I'll use longer names. Probably something like this set:
STRING_DATA(obj) /* produces a char* */
STRING_REF(obj,index)
STRING_SET(obj,index,newbyteval)
STRING_INTERVALS(obj)
STRING_SET_INTERVALS(obj,interval)
STRING_NBYTES(obj) /* STRING_BYTES exists, takes Lisp_String ptr */
STRING_NCHARS(obj)
STRING_MULTIBYTE(obj) /* already present */
STRING_SET_UNIBYTE(obj) /* all uses of SET_STRING_BYTES are of the
form SET_STRING_BYTES(XSTRING(x),-1) */
And I'll remove or rename the macros operating on Lisp_String struct
pointers or with the terse names.
STRING_SET_BYTES(ptr,-1) -> STRING_SET_UNIBYTE(obj)
STRING_BYTES(ptr) -> STRING_NBYTES(obj)
XSTRING(obj)->foo -> STRING_foo(obj),STRING_SET_foo(obj,...)
SREF -> STRING_REF
SDATA -> STRING_DATA
etc
With a pervasive change like this, do you really want separate
checkins for each file and detailed function-level change log and CVS
log entries for everything affected? It's tedious, but doable; I'm
just unclear on how important you feel that level of detail is for
pervasive changes of such a simple nature. Occasionally other changes
have been checked in with log entries like "all callers changed"; most
(but not all) of them are for static functions, so it's still
describing changes confined to the one file.
Ken
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-07-03 2:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-30 23:13 abstracting Lisp strings - macro name convention? Ken Raeburn
2002-07-02 7:37 ` Richard Stallman
2002-07-03 2:09 ` Ken Raeburn [this message]
2002-07-03 13:13 ` Stefan Monnier
2002-07-03 14:06 ` Kim F. Storm
2002-07-03 13:16 ` Miles Bader
2002-07-03 13:17 ` Henrik Enberg
2002-07-04 7:07 ` Richard Stallman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=tx1u1nhwojn.fsf@raeburn.org \
--to=raeburn@raeburn.org \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).