[Xcb] XCB naming conventions

[Barton C Massey]

If we're going to change names for the integral types, we
should just use the C99 names verbatim (with no
modification).  My inclination is to make this change.

Keep in mind that the old X names were chosen back when
there wasn't any widely-accepted convention for integral
type names (or even that it was a good idea).  I suspect
that the original protocol developers would have used the
C99 names in documentation if they were available.

Besides, when somebody finally finishes the documentation
generation, our documents will become canonical anyhow. :-)

	Bart

In message <20060913201142.GB19013 at id.minilop.net> you wrote:
> 
> --===============2081846165==
> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
> 	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="WhfpMioaduB5tiZL"
> Content-Disposition: inline
> 
> 
> --WhfpMioaduB5tiZL
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> 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=
> =20
> > for looking up the x11 protocol we probably want to stick with the use of=
> =20
> > card/int etc. types instead of the c99 intrinsics, but I guess it really=
> =20
> > 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 i=
> t=20
> > 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
> 
> --WhfpMioaduB5tiZL
> Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
> Content-Description: Digital signature
> Content-Disposition: inline
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQFFCGX+p1aplQ4I9mURAjXuAKCCUwn84h3pLx+oyT02Q2l8XQeJkwCbBUOv
> hcCKmlbg23iY6N/sbOJWekM=
> =BDkf
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> --WhfpMioaduB5tiZL--
> 
> --===============2081846165==
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Disposition: inline
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xcb mailing list
> Xcb at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xcb
> --===============2081846165==--