On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:29:45AM +0300, Tor Lillqvist <[email protected]> wrote: > But how is the fact that you see that some lcl_Function is "local" > make it easier to understand what the function does? Isn't it only > unnecessary visual fluff?
Example: if it's lcl_Foo(), I just search in the local file. If it's a method, I use ctags to look up the function definition. > Anyway, my main point was not that we should drop the "lcl_" prefix, > but that we should make these functions *actually* local, also for the > tool-chain, i.e. either static or in anonymous namespaces. Agreed, if Lubos' compiler plugin could check for lcl_ functions that are not static / in an anon namespace, that would be great, I guess. :-) _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
