Cleaning up include file inconsistencies
beldmit at gmail.com
Sat Jul 6 08:44:33 UTC 2019
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
> 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
> ~/src/openssl$ find -name '*_locl.h' | wc -l
> What's your opinion about renaming of those files?
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openssl-project