From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dan Nicolaescu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: rename and clean unexec.c Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:21:40 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83hbjjcxex.fsf@gnu.org> <87sk33pdpf.fsf@telefonica.net> <83aapbcoqs.fsf@gnu.org> <838w4vc7gs.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1280373712 17685 80.91.229.12 (29 Jul 2010 03:21:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 03:21:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 29 05:21:48 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OeJgq-0006Kw-0H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 05:21:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50053 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OeJgp-0008HT-Di for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:21:47 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50492 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OeJgk-0008GB-PU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:21:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OeJgj-000114-J1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:21:42 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:39085) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OeJgj-000110-D6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:21:41 -0400 Original-Received: from dann by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OeJgi-0006ru-Dw; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:21:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <838w4vc7gs.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu\, 29 Jul 2010 06\:06\:27 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:127952 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Dan Nicolaescu >> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:55:45 -0400 >> Cc: =D3scar Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org >>=20 >> Eli Zaretskii writes: >>=20 >> >> From: =D3scar Fuentes >> >> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:13:16 +0200 >> >>=20 >> >> Speaking as someone who is getting familiar with the code base, it is >> >> useful to see a hint on the name about its platform-specific nature. >> > >> > unexec.c is not DOS-specific. It is for any platform that uses COFF. >> > It just so happens that MSDOS is the only one that still does. >>=20 >> Then let's call it unexcoff.c then so that it follows some kind of >> rule like all the other unexec files. It's not very logical to refuse >> to change the least used one. > > Why is it so important to rename this file? I'm not against renaming For long term maintainability. Good, suggestive file names are good for maintainability. When we have a rule and a single file does not follow it, it not good. We finally have the right support for renaming so there's not reason to keep a very old name that's not accurate anymore and it's the wrong place to look for the "unexec" function for close to (100% -1person) of the developers.