Re: Minimal working example (Re: set_buffer_mode)

Chris Angelico wrote:
>>>I thought it was a convention that started in languages like C++,
>>>where you tend to write getter/setter methods with the "nice" names,
>>>and then adorn the implementation details with underscores.

>Yes, which is actually a very specific form of name mangling (the
>"real" name will have the class name included), and it's actually not
>very often used. There's also the "we're all adults here, please don't
>use this as it's private" name-only convention of a single underscore.

Well, as far as I recall, it's part of the C89 standard that any identifiers
starting with an underscore are library/C-compiler reserved namespace.

As far as my (Pike) code is concerned, whenever I use the underscore at the
start of an identifier, it is intended to convey that actually I wanted to
declare the member to be "private", but since it is being referenced by
"friend" classes, I can't, due to the lack of the C++ friend equivalent
in Pike.
-- 
Stephen.