Q: programming style -- uppercase vs. lowercase

QNX Newsgroups (Archives) qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy
21

“Mario Charest” <mcharest@voidzinformatic.com> wrote

“David Alessio” <> david.alessio@hsa.hitachi.com> > wrote

That’s not portable. Names with trailing “_t” are “reserved for
implementation” by POSIX. I know that inside this building, we
control what our implementation defines, but if you’re writing an
application that you want to easily port to other OSes (or if you
aren’t
a QNX employee), it’s good to adopt some other convention for your
typedefs.


Hmmm, I got used to this typedef name_t convention (didn’t know POSIX
claimed *_t). Any suggestions for alternatives?

That was disturbing news to me as well ;-( I’ll keep on doing _t in
existing code
to keep things consistent.

But for new code i’ve though of prefixing _td (TypeDef).

I was not aware of the _t convention. I’ve never used _t for my own types.

But if I did I would not stop using it just because of this convention. Of
course I realize that the risk is that some day some ANSI committe will
decide to define BillsPersonalData_t and all of my code will have to be
changed.

–
Bill Caroselli – 1(530) 510-7292
Q-TPS Consulting
QTPS@EarthLink.net

22

“Bill Caroselli (Q-TPS)” <qtps@earthlink.net> wrote:

I was not aware of the _t convention. I’ve never used _t for my own types.
But if I did I would not stop using it just because of this convention. Of
course I realize that the risk is that some day some ANSI committe will
decide to define BillsPersonalData_t and all of my code will have to be
changed.

Not necessarily some ANSI committee – just some person called Bill at a
company that manufactures an OS that you want to port your code to.

\

Wojtek Lerch QNX Software Systems Ltd.