Re: RISC OS port

[Timothy Baldwin]

On Friday 03 Dec 2004 12:53, Marco Gerards wrote:
> Timothy Baldwin <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > Instead part of functionality of the stubs is included in 
> > kern/arm/RISC_OS/startup.S, as such we are free to choose which names we 
> > use 
> > for them. For clairity I suggest we use the standard names, as opposed to 
> > prefixing the names with grub_RISC_OS_ or simular.
> 
> Better use a prefix, right?  I don't see how it will get clearer by
> not using the prefix.

Using a prefix would suggest that the function was defined in
GRUB. Without the prefix the function is instantly recognisable
as a system C library function.

For example: What does grub_risc_os_system do?

Using standard names for externally defined functions is established
practise in GRUB, but previousally we have not had the choice.

> And the coding style used in GRUB says to use 
> prefixes, so we can better do that unless it really is not possible.

It isn't set in stone.
-- 
Member AFFS, WYLUG, SWP (UK), ANL, RESPECT, Leeds SA, Leeds Anti-war coalition
No to software patents!    Victory to the iraqi resistance!