Closed ni4 closed 3 years ago
CC @rnpgp/developers
.clang-format
this is awesomeLGTM, how do we move forward with this? ping @dewyatt
@ronaldtse There is a WIP PR here: https://github.com/rnpgp/rnp/pull/1325 Will get back to it today or tomorrow.
Closing this as a lot of C++ code was already written and merged.
Description
As part of C++ refactoring I've got to the point where started moving signature_get_something/signature_set_somethhing/signature_do_something functions to the pgp_signature_t methods. And since we do not have reference example in the code, I'd like to discuss do/not to do and other coding style concerns so we'd be stick to the single standard in future. Following is the
pgp_signature_t
declaration I have at the moment (with unrelated parts cut out), with questions and concerns below.type_
,type()
,set_type()
. Is these good to go or better stick to other strategy?bool get_keyid(pgp_key_id_t &id) const;
. What is better - this one, or throwingconst pgp_key_id_t &keyid() const
? Since keyid value is not always available.