On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 3:19 AM, <marcel-hollerb...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> i agree - it is "self" within that context. within an eo_add() only. it's not >> used anywhere else (or to be used). efl_self is simple and fairly obvious as >> what it implies - you just need to learn the "it is only used in this >> context". >> if we rename it will it change this at all? i doubt it. it'll be harder to >> DISCOVER but people may still be as confused as to why we renamed it >> something >> else than "self" or "this". > > As i said in the other mail, its NOT simple and fairly obvious, eo_add > does NOT open a new scope where it is obvious that now the just added > object is self. It still looks like you are in the scope of your calling > function. And so self there is missleading. > > And of course someone who wants to use the api should learn the api. But > why making it harder by naming things in a way that the api can be > confusing? > > Also its not harder to discover a other name its still in the same > place, the reason why it should be not be self or this is more that its > different and can be missunderstood. I don't like that efl_self is a macro. It is completely unnecessary for it to be a macro. On the naming issue: I think there's too much magic on eo_add, I liked the older passing a pointer to the actual object better. But I was the only one. [snip] Regards, -- Felipe Magno de Almeida ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
