This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [rfa] `struct _bfd' -> `struct bfd'
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian at airs dot com>
- To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 24 Feb 2003 23:53:06 -0800
- Subject: Re: [rfa] `struct _bfd' -> `struct bfd'
- References: <3E59C04D.3040304@redhat.com> <3E5ADEE5.4050803@redhat.com>
Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com> writes:
> To follow this up, I've a stylistic question. Which of:
>
> sec_ptr
> asection *
> struct sec *
>
> is prefered. GDB uses all three which makes things really
> confusing. While GDB's coding standards prefer `struct sec *' (and
> detest sec_ptr) does BFD have a stylistic preference.
I certainly think sec_ptr should be removed.
I tended to use asection * myself. But then I tended to use bfd *,
not struct _bfd *.
Ian