[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: UVM typedef struct
On Jul 22, 2009, at 9:39 AM, Chuck Cranor wrote:
If we feel typedef structs are important, I would be in favor of
some sort of hungarian notation for the type names, so the semantic
information is not lost (e.g. struct vs struct *). But is it worth
the effort to do that?
If the APIs are designed well, you:
1- Won't be dealing with structs directly, only through accessors /
mutators (ABI stability).
2- Won't have to know / care what underlying type you're dealing with
If we ever want to have a chance of supporting a modular kernel really
well, then we need to have better ABI stability in our kernel, which
means forcing the issue of opaque types.
Main Index |
Thread Index |