2012/11/8 Henri Verbeet hverbeet@gmail.com
On 8 November 2012 00:22, Michael Stefaniuc 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? I was just saying removing the interface name was not a good thing imo or am I missing something?