Cleaning up include file inconsistencies

[Dmitry Belyavsky]

Hello,

I'd like either _lcl.h or _local.h.
_locl.h seems weird to me :)


On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 10:32 AM Dr. Matthias St. Pierre <
Matthias.St.Pierre at ncp-e.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> pull request #9274 started out as a task to clean up inconsistencies in
> the naming
> of the include guards. It turned out that there are also some
> inconsistencies in the
> naming of the include files.
>
> Please take a look at the general discussion starting at
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/9274#issuecomment-508824668
> between Bernd and me.
>
> In particular, in
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/9274#issuecomment-508826903 and
> following the question was raised whether all local `*_lcl.h` files should
> be renamed
> to `*_locl.h` for consistency reasons, and the pros and cons discussed.
> The latter choice was suggested by a source tree vote:
>
>    ~/src/openssl$ find -name '*_lcl.h' | wc -l
>    19
>     ~/src/openssl$ find -name '*_locl.h' | wc -l
>     30
>
> What's your opinion about renaming of those files?
>
> Matthias
>
>

-- 
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-project/attachments/20190706/84e01eef/attachment.html>