Jim Wrote: > Okay, so there's a discussion about identifier names in the proposed std.path > replacement -- should they be abbreviated or not? > Should we perhaps seek to have a consistent naming convention for all > identifier names in Phobos? > > > Some of the potential benefits: > > Legibility, understandability and clarity (reduce ambiguity). > Ease in finding a suitable function/class by name. > Knowing if it's a cheap or costly function call. > Aesthetics and professional appearance. > > > Some properties that I can think of for discussion: > > Abbreviation (and if so, what to abbreviate and how much)? > Preference of commonly used terms in other languages, contexts? > Use of get and set prefixes or not (getName() or simply name())? > Explicit use of a prefix (example: calc or calculate) for costly operations? > Naming of function and template arguments? > Uppercase, lowercase, camelcase, underscore in multi-word names? All caps > for constants, or different appearance for different types (types, functions, > arguments, constants...). What about acronyms: TCP, Tcp? > > Are there other concerns?
Phobos naming convention should be a major adjustment! thanks all ! dolive
