On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:54 PM, Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1) When there is a one to one mapping between a Scheme variable/constant & a > C variable/macro-constant/constant/enum should the Scheme symbol naming > mirror the C naming? Should the C 'SOME_C_LIBRARY_MACCONST' identifier be > mapped to the Scheme 'SOME_C_LIBRARY_MACCONST', or some Scheme'ish > 'some-c-library-macconst'?
> 2) A C procedure binding name: 'some_c_func' -> 'foreign-some-c-func' , > 'some_c_func', 'C_some_c_func'? I prefer the scheme style for any exported API. I use the C style only for internal stuff which is basically on the bare metal (maybe using a similar schemely name for a nicer wrapper), or when I really want to warn the user this is lowlevel stuff. Example from socket egg, SO_REUSEADDR -> so/reuseaddr (low-level integer value), and socket-reuse-address (high-level procedure). Here I did not happen to use "SO_REUSEADDR" verbatim, though that would have been acceptable. I just don't like shouting. In short, it depends on the egg. _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
