From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>
To: Charles Celerier <cceleri@cs.stanford.edu>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib: Precede all function names in notmuch-private.h
	with an	underscore.
In-Reply-To: <87d2fjgtcr.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>
References: <1399402716-13714-1-git-send-email-cceleri@cs.stanford.edu>
	<87d2fjgtcr.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 20:29:09 +0900
Message-ID: <877g5rgrqy.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: list

David Bremner <david@tethera.net> writes:

> Charles Celerier <cceleri@cs.stanford.edu> writes:
>
>> An underscore should precede every function name in
>> lib/notmuch-private.h. This was not true and was noted by the failure of
>> test T360-symbol-hiding on Mac OS/X. This patch inserts an underscore
>> before each function name in lib/notmuch-private.h where the underscore
>> was missing and renames functions appropriately where they are used.
>
> Originally I thought this was uneccesarily intrusive, but on a second
> look I see that there is only one symbol changed that doesn't start with
> _notmuch, so I guess for consistency it's fine.
>
> I'm thinking about a 0.18.1 point release for build and portability
> fixes; I do think this is a bit too much change for that (especially
> since it doesn't actually fix the symbol hiding test (or more precisely,
> your fix for OS/X breaks the linux test).

Also, I'd like a less confusing commit message.  Do you understand the
situation enough to write one now? In particular it's just a convention
that private symbols should not start with "notmuch", and the actual
hiding happens elsewhere.

d