Re: [flashrom] Namespace prefix for libflashrom

[Antonio Ospite]

On Sun, 23 Apr 2017 15:54:50 -0700
David Hendricks <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Stefan Tauner <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 11:16:18 -0700
> > David Hendricks <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > [...]
> > I'd love to hear some arguments about your preferences.
>
> I'd be fine with libflashrom_. Since it seems there is no definitive
> favorite short prefix I think we should just forget about those and use a
> longer one. And in the grand scheme of things neither libflashrom_ nor
> flashrom_ are very long.

After hearing the arguments on the list I too formed an opinion about
the matter, my preference list is:

 - flashrom_ (the lib prefix is redundant IMHO, lot of libraries omit
              it in the API, e.g.: libglib, libgtk);
 - libflashrom_ (I would tolerate it, it's still better than cryptic
                 prefixes);

and maybe one I didn't see:

 - libfr_ (flash-rom is two words, so "fr" as abbreviation makes sense,
           but there's really no need to be so concise).

Ciao ciao,
   Antonio

-- 
Antonio Ospite
https://ao2.it
https://twitter.com/ao2it

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
   See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?