Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!think.com!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.iastate.edu!sharkey!tygra!dave From: dave@tygra.UUCP (David Conrad) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: typedef names (was: Is typedef char BUFFER[20] legal?) Keywords: POSIX, reserved namespace Message-ID: <1991Feb1.112141.28914@tygra.UUCP> Date: 1 Feb 91 11:21:41 GMT References: <1212@tredysvr.Tredydev.Unisys.COM> <1991Jan29.210100.8105@zoo.toronto.edu> <665344102.6268@mindcraft.com> Organization: CAT-TALK Conferencing Network, Detroit, MI Lines: 24 In article <665344102.6268@mindcraft.com> fred@mindcraft.com (Fred Zlotnick) writes: >So, if you want your programs to port to POSIX.1 conforming systems, this >convention is no longer ok. I had previously used an "_t" suffix for >typedef names, but have stopped. My current convention is to use "_T" >(and to use lower case letters for the rest of the type name), but I'm >not thrilled with it. Any suggestions? >---- >Fred Zlotnick | #include >fred@mindcraft.com | #include >...!{decwrl,ames,hpda}!mindcrf!fred | Yes, I'd like to suggest that the POSIX.1 standard sucks. Let the programmer have _t, make the system use _t_ or something equally ugly. -- David Conrad tygra!dave@uunet.uu.net tygra!dave@sharkey.cc.umich.edu (The address in the last line below is BROKEN.) -- = CAT-TALK Conferencing Network, Computer Conferencing and File Archive = - 1-313-343-0800, 300/1200/2400/9600 baud, 8/N/1. New users use 'new' - = as a login id. AVAILABLE VIA PC-PURSUIT!!! (City code "MIDET") = E-MAIL Address: dave@DDMI.COM