[gdal-dev] Refactoring: class members clean-up

[Mateusz Loskot]

On 17 October 2015 at 00:25, Kurt Schwehr <schwehr at gmail.com> wrote:
> I personally like foo_, but m_ is fine.

I personally too, but we should stick to what has already been used in GDAL.

> I worry about unexpected side
> effects of changing member naming with private members.

I don't suggest changing members visibility.

> If we go for changing
> publics, we should pick a time and go for a major version number bump and
> expect a lot of peopIe using GDAL to go through a lot of pain.  I see a lot
> of stuff generally like this...
> ...

Public members should stay as they are, not renamed.
That is also Even's suggestion.

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz  Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net