[Xcb] XCB naming conventions

[Jamey Sharp]

On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 09:52:54PM +0200, Vincent Torri wrote:
> should we use card8_t, or uint8_t ?

The question comes down to that, yes, though all our types ought to be
xcb_ namespaced, so it'd be xcb_card8_t.

Does anyone else have an opinion? I'm leaning toward uint8_t at the
moment, myself.

On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 03:49:30PM -0400, Jeremy A. Kolb wrote:
> Since one of the goals of the project is to eventually become THE PLACE 
> for looking up the x11 protocol we probably want to stick with the use of 
> card/int etc. types instead of the c99 intrinsics, but I guess it really 
> doesn't matter.

Well, xcb-proto should be the standard reference. The XCB API, on the
other hand, isn't meant to be a reference for anything. So while the
XML-XCB protocol descriptions must still use CARD8, WINDOW, etc., we can
use xcb_card8_t or uint8_t or whatever makes sense.

> I don't know xsl but I guess I could poke a bit if it's not that hard.

On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 09:52:54PM +0200, Vincent Torri wrote:
> I'll try to hack that xslt file, but I really don't know if i'll finish it 
> in time.

Sounds like you two should be collaborating on this. My "deadline" was
more for the source conversion script, though. It would just make it a
lot easier for me to accept this proposal if you can hand me both
patches soon. :-)

You may be able to find other people to help you on IRC, too. I'd like
to encourage you to do whatever it takes to meet my challenge. :-)

--Jamey
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/attachments/20060913/aa99bae8/attachment.pgp