> � � <mailto:
mstefani@redhat.com>> wrote:
> � � > But using just the capitalized letters from the name of the COM
> � � class as
> � � > a prefix and skipping the "Impl" would be in hindsight the better
> � � > standard. There are still 170+ COM interfaces to clean up which is a
> � � > sizable number regardless of it being just 13% of the total interface
> � � > implementations, so we could still change the standard, especially as
> � � > the existing function/method naming standard is not strictly
> � � enforced; I
> � � > didn't bother changing "offenders" if the name was reasonable.
> � � > But I'm deferring this decision to Jacek / Alexandre as they are the
> � � > drivers of the COM standardization in Wine. I don't mind too much as I
> � � > can work with both patterns.
> � � >
> � � I think the only reasonable naming convention is to name things after
> � � the implementation structure. In this case that would still end up
> � � being "IDirectMusicLoaderImpl_...", but for a slightly different
> � � reason. Where I agree with Nikolay is that "dmloader" would be a much
> � � nicer name than "IDirectMusicLoaderImpl" for the implementation
> � � structure as well, in which case you would also end up with
> � � "dmloader_..." for method implementations.
>
>
> dmloader_IDirectMusicLoader_Method or dmloader_Method?