[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] document network driver framework

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Mike Frysinger,

In message <200907210228.09882.vapier at gentoo.org> you wrote:
> >
> > Is this a generally-accepted naming convention?  I personally think it's
> > crap, and since there isn't a single driver that uses it yet, you might
> > say this is a bit ahead of the curve.
>
> some style needed to be suggested, and what Jean proposed is better than what 
> we have today (which is nothing)

Arent't we pretty much doing what Linux is doing here, too? I see lots
of XXX_init functions in the Linux network code, for example.

> that's why i said "should", deprecated current naming, and noted existing 
> practice.  if you agree with the proposal, it's easy enough to run sed on a  
> few files to fix one function name.  you agree with my comment that today's  
> behavior is confusing even if you stare and bang on the code day in and day  
> out ?  it's even worse for the occasional observer ...

Hm... renaming  something  from  "xxx_init()"  into  "xxx_register()"
because  other  code  is also also using "xxx_init()" does not really
make anything clearer to me. Actually IMO  it  just  adds  confusion,
because  if  other's  use  "xxx_init()" I'd expect from a consistence
point of view that we use "xxx_init()", too.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
The one who says it cannot be done should never interrupt the one who
is doing it.