> ��� ��� <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?