And perhaps good reason for removing it from the style guide? ;-)
On 6/25/18 3:08 PM, Emilio Cobos Álvarez wrote: > And Kris pointed out that we already had another huge thread on this: > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mozilla.dev.platform/WAuySoTfq_w/-DggRotpBQAJ > > > Looks like there wasn't agreement on that one... But oh well, don't want > to repeat a lot of that discussion. > > I think the argument for consistency with the other systems language we > have in-tree, the fact that it's not predominant (at least for enum > classes) even though it is in the coding style, and that there wasn't > agreement in the previous thread are good reasons for not enforcing it, > but... > > -- Emilio > > On 6/25/18 10:41 PM, Emilio Cobos Álvarez wrote: >> Our coding style states that we should use an `e` prefix for enum >> variants, that is: >> >> enum class Foo { eBar, eBaz }; >> >> We're not really consistent about it: looking at layout/, we mostly >> use CamelCase, though we do have some prefixed enums. Looking at other >> modules, enum classes almost never use it either. DOM bindings also >> don't use that prefix. >> >> I think that with enum classes the usefulness of the prefix is less >> justified. Plus removing them would allow us to match the Rust coding >> style as well, which is nice IMO. >> >> Would anybody object to making the prefix non-mandatory, removing that >> line from the coding style doc? Maybe only making it non-mandatory for >> enum classes? >> >> Thanks, >> >> -- Emilio >> _______________________________________________ >> dev-platform mailing list >> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org >> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
