> <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?