core reorg. request

[Gunnar Dalsnes]

Hi,

Does anyone object agains:
-moving every NtXxx functions into new files under ntoskrnl\nt?
-moveing functions related to ob managed types into new files (thrdobj.c,
procobj,c, eventobj.c, fileobj.c etc)?

This will make it clearer where the functions are and what they do.


Gunnar

[Alex Ionescu]

Gunnar Dalsnes wrote:

>  Hi,
>
> Does anyone object agains:
> -moving every NtXxx functions into new files under ntoskrnl\nt?
>   
>  
I do. Actually I think \nt shoudl go away.

>  -moveing functions related to ob managed types into new
> files (thrdobj.c,
> procobj,c, eventobj.c, fileobj.c etc)?
>   
>  
You mean renaming apc.c to apcobj.c, thread.c to threadobj.c, etc?
I don't see why not.

>  This will make it clearer where the functions are and
> what they do.
>
>
> Gunnar
>
>   
>  
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu

"Gunnar Dalsnes" <hardon(a)online.no> wrote:


>   Does anyone object agains:
>  -moving every NtXxx functions into new files under ntoskrnl\nt? 
I don't think it makes sense because most of the Nt functions are just
wrappers around underlying object functions (eg. NtSetEvent/KeSetEvent).
IMHO, moving the Nt functions closer to the underlying objects makes more
sense (nt/ntevent.c --> ke/ntevent.c) and keep the original names of the
objects file so we will have 'ke/event.c' and 'ke/ntevent.c'.

>   -moveing functions related to ob managed types into
> new files (thrdobj.c,
>  procobj,c, eventobj.c, fileobj.c etc)?
>
> This will make it clearer where the functions are and what they do. 
So thrdobj.c is more descriptive than for example ps/thread.c? Hmmm!?


Regards,
Eric

[Gunnar Dalsnes]

>   So thrdobj.c is more descriptive than for example
> ps/thread.c? Hmmm!?
>   
We would still have thread.c. 

thrdobj.c would fex. just include code to manage the ObjectManager type
"PsThreadType", for the moment being only PsInitThreadManagment and
PiDeleteThread, but later when/if security functions etc. are added it might
make more sense. It's almost eqvivalent to putting a class and its member
functions into an own file.

Anyways, this is just a suggestion. The reason for this proposal was that i
looked thru the thread/process code, and i see stuff that looks like it
belong into the ctor/dtor of an object. Having own files for types
w/functions might make this more clear.

Nt reorg. update:
-some wants to keep nt functions where they are (currently they are in \nt
and spread around in misc. files)
-some wants to move nt functions into end of files in related subsystems
(nt\ntsem.c -> ke\sem.c etc)
-some wants to move nt functions into related subsystems, but in own files
(nt\ntsem.c -> ke\ntsem.c etc)

Hmmmmm........

Regard
Gunnar

>   
>  Regards,
>  Eric
>  
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.com
>  http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>  
>  
>  
>

[Anich Gregor]

On Monday 22 November 2004 19:52, Gunnar Dalsnes wrote:
>   Hi,
>
>  Does anyone object agains:
>  -moving every NtXxx functions into new files under ntoskrnl\nt?
>  -moveing functions related to ob managed types into new files (thrdobj.c,
>  procobj,c, eventobj.c, fileobj.c etc)?
>
>  This will make it clearer where the functions are and what they do.
>
>
>  Gunnar
>  
I don't like either idea.

Just my €0.02,
 -blight