Carsten Dominik <carsten.domi...@gmail.com> writes: > On Jun 26, 2010, at 6:30 PM, Štěpán Němec wrote: > >> "Eric Schulte" <schulte.e...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Štěpán Němec <step...@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>> [...] >>>> >>>> How come some of your rewrites above still use the `org-babel-' >>>> prefix? >>>> (As a side note, I don't see what Emacs guidelines suggest `ob-' >>>> is more >>>> appropriate than `org-babel-', and I would personally prefer to retain >>>> the latter -- it's much more descriptive.) >>>> >>>> Štěpán >>>> >>> >>> Hi Štěpán, >>> >>> The guidelines I mentioned (I believe) specify that all file names for >>> emacs-lisp files which are part of Emacs must be unique in the first 6 >>> or so characters. This is why all "(require 'ob-*)" lines (which must >>> correspond to file names) now use ob-* instead of org-babel-*. Since I >>> (like you) prefer the org-babel-* prefixes, those have been retained for >>> all function and variable names. >> >> I see. Hm... could you provide some source for that? The only >> restriction on file names I can recall is this section from Appendix D >> of the Emacs Lisp Reference Manual: >> >> * Please keep the names of your Emacs Lisp source files to 13 >> characters or less. This way, if the files are compiled, the >> compiled files' names will be 14 characters or less, which is >> short enough to fit on all kinds of Unix systems. > > This is a restriction from the compiler. > > However, Emacs wants to be installable on many systems, including MS- > DOS, which has only 8+3 character file names. Therefore, Emacs requires that > the names are unique in the first 8 letters - they may be longer than 8, but > they must be unique when shortened. > > I cannot find the reference now, but I did explicitly ask a short while ago > and got this confirmed by Stefan Monnier.
Ah, right, I remember that, yes. MS-DOG strikes again. >> Is that perhaps what you meant? In any case, I see that the >> recommendation I quote above would make the file renaming necessary, >> too. >> >> (Also, I believe you actually did mention renaming *functions*, which >> created my confusion in the first place -- cf. the commit message of >> e0e4d76094f26 for example.) >> >>> Hope this explains it, I'm certainly open to other naming suggestions. >> >> It would make a lot of sense to at least still begin the file names with >> `org' IMHO, if at all possible. > > This will not solve the problem, I fear. Indeed. In this light `ob-' looks more like "as good as it gets". Štěpán _______________________________________________ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode