I would like to point out that identifiers like "__XCB_H__" and "__XCBEXT_H" do not fit to the expected naming convention of the C language standard. http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xcb/libxcb/tree/src/xcb.h?id=ac47e0ecdb46aa91b191a59364437a8f65947467#n28 http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xcb/libxcb/tree/src/xcbext.h?id=9ae84ad187e2ba440c40f44b8eb21c82c2fdbf12#n28 Would you like to adjust your selection for unique names? https://www.securecoding.cert.org/confluence/display/seccode/DCL37-C.+Do+not+declare+or+define+a+reserved+identifier#DCL37-C.Donotdeclareordefineareservedidentifier-NoncompliantCodeExample%28HeaderGuard%29
It's certainly not a high priority, and it's unlikely this will ever cause an issue, but sure, we ought to switch to something like FOO_H_INCLUDED.
Unless you provide patches, I doubt that anyone will ever work on this. Having this with and without underscores it just equally likely to run into a collision, so there is no point.
(In reply to comment #2) I could show a patch after a basic clarification for acceptance of corresponding changes. How do you think about to avoid that this software depends on undefined behaviour? https://www.securecoding.cert.org/confluence/display/seccode/CC.+Undefined+Behavior#CC.UndefinedBehavior-ub_106
While the standard may not define the behavior, all our supported compilers do, so we don't need to avoid it.
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.