<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
<meta name="generator" content="pandoc" />
<title></title>
<style type="text/css">code{white-space: pre;}</style>
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi Rémi,</p>
<p>On 2017-02-18 11:50, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:</p>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;color:#500050">
<pre><code> Le lauantaina 18. helmikuuta 2017, 10.30.40 EET Filip Roséen a écrit :</code></pre>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;color:#500050">
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;color:#500050">
<pre><code> This is valid but I don´t know why a very few developpers do this. The
defacto standard is qualifier before type.</code></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre><code> Not sure what *"defacto standard"* you are referring to,</code></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre><code> It is both de jure standard (ISO C uses const type, and so does POSIX), and de
facto (most code and most devs use that order too).</code></pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I was not talking about the conventions used in standards issued by <em>ISO WG14</em> and <em>ISO WG21</em>, I was referring to usage in the wild (and “de facto standards” that prohibits/frowns upon <em>“type cv-qualifier”</em> vs <em>“cv-qualifier type”</em>.</p>
<p>As this is becoming off-topic, I would be happy to discuss such preference in a separate discussion (perhaps over IRC as it seems like a suitable medium).</p>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;color:#500050">
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;color:#500050">
<pre><code> We should spend some time writing up a coding guideline so that we do
not have to end up with reviews such as this (where it is quite
obvious that things boil down to a personal taste).</code></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre><code> Taste? We do this when it servers some purpose, such as hiding the structure
layout in a more private location. Here, it does not.
The reason why we have to many typedef struct a a; is hysterical raisins from
vlc_symbols.h era.</code></pre>
</blockquote>
<p>No comment.</p>
<p>Adjustments will be made to satisfy the expressed opinions. I will wait a little before posting an updated patch so that others might have a chance to ask for other changes (as posting patch after patch with minor changes are more tedious to review).</p>
<p>/F</p>
</body>
</html>