On 2011-05-29 23:07, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 05/29/2011 01:42 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-05-29 20:34, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 05/29/2011 01:32 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Sometimes you are very consistent but other times you just want to go
with the shortest. Why can't we have it consistent?
Again, consistency is a relation, not a value, i.e. consistent with
_what_ is key. In this case I'm being consistent with glog's choice of
names.
Andrei
Why are you so fixed with glog, yes I know you think it's a great
library, could you please let it go and try to think out of the box that
is glog.
This is not "thinking", it's a simple name choice.
Can we have it consistent within our own logging API and for one second
forget that the API is original based on glog?
That would be circular logic. I'm sure you are referring to consistency
with the general naming convention in Phobos, which I agree would also
be desirable. The delicate thing is satisfying everybody.
Andrei
Yes, it would be more consistent with the rest of Phobos. But if we just
take a look at the logging library and for one second forget that the
API is originally from glog then "vlog" is not consistent with how the
other functions are named, "info" and "error" for example.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
