On 1/8/15 11:48 AM, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Am Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:50:10 -0800
schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]>:
On 1/8/15 9:16 AM, Kiith-Sa wrote:
This is a problem with naming, not with DDox. It would look bad
regardless of generator, or regardless of documentation at all. You
could make it look slightly less bad, but you might end up hurting
other documentation. (I'm not implying it should be renamed (bad
reason for breaking compatibility), but I see no point in changing
doc generation just because of some bad naming.)
Sigh. No matter how I look at it, the same name repeated FOUR times
only evokes Java's factory factory etc. -- Andrei
These 4x digest variants never occur in real code though:
http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.digest.html is a
class member function. You never use the full name,
it's always instance.digest()
http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.html could be used
with the full name. But ironically the name is not used outside of
std.digest so it's usually not necessary to use the full name.
So it doesn't look nice in the docs but it's not a huge problem when
writing code.
This is a matter common with words that are both noun and verb. "Let's
have a Digest object that digests stuff." I think the review should have
prompted a name change. -- Andrei
