[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Naming conventions for defining macros
From: |
Barry Margolin |
Subject: |
Re: Naming conventions for defining macros |
Date: |
Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:38:48 -0500 |
User-agent: |
MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X) |
In article <mailman.727.1424760332.31049.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>,
Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the manual page about coding conventions says: "Constructs that define a
> function or variable should be macros, not functions, and their names
> should start with `define-'." This recommendation is at odds with the usual
> recommendation to prefix all non-local names with the package name and
> doesn't seem to be widely followed by either Emacs (e.g. ert-deftest,
> cl-defstruct) or popular third-party packages (e.g. magit-define-command).
> Should we get rid of this recommendation? It amounts to special-casing a
> certain class of names without much benefit.
I think you're expected to combine the conventions, hence
magit-define-command. It obeys the recommendation to use the package
name prefix, then the define- prefix.
--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***