[Bug 1635] Refactor Priority bit map handling

[bugzilla-daemon at rtems.org]

https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1635

--- Comment #5 from Gedare <giddyup44 at yahoo.com> 2010-07-27 17:17:58 CDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> The names of the routines are close but I think miss the standard pattern.
> 
> The pattern is _Package_Method so in C++ package::method if you like.
> 
> If this is the Priority Bitmap handler, then the names should be something
> line _Priority_Bitmap_Add( &priority_map )
> 
> -        _Priority_Add_to_bit_map( &the_thread->Priority_map );
> +        _Priority_Add_bit_map( &the_thread->Priority_map );
> 
> Does that make sense?

I see.. I was thinking along the lines of inheritance I guess, so
_Package_Method_implementer (or even Implementer), so for a bit-map priority
handler it might be _Priority_Add_Bit_map, and for a tree-based priority
handler it might be _Priority_Add_Tree.  But I can see that organizing by the
implementer might be better, and is more consistent with the current naming
scheme.

Should I use a three-some of _Package_Implementation_Method, so
_Priority_Bit_map_Add(), or just _Priority_Bit_map_add()?

I'll re-do this tomorrow or after I get your response, and will submit a new
patch and tgz.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.