I'm for the .NET style.
- Easy to reason about.
- No confusion about what to do with acronyms.
- No inconsistency about what to do with acronyms. (If there are special
rules, people WILL use them inconsistent.)
- Gc/GcMut looks in my opinion better than either GC/GCMut and GC/GcMut.
Am 03.08.2013 03:28, schrieb Patrick Walton:
Hi everyone,
Brendan Eich emailed me expressing a preference for `GC<>` over
`Gc<>`. I think now is as good a time as any to have the bikeshedding
debate :)
I've noticed two styles for acronyms in type names: Java style
(HTTPServer) versus .NET style (HttpServer). Currently we are usually
using .NET style, but inconsistently (e.g. ARC). We never really decided.
Here are a few examples of types in each style:
* Java style: GC<Foo>, ARC<int>, SimpleHTTPServer, XMLHTTPRequest.
* .NET style: Gc<Foo>, Arc<int>, SimpleHttpServer, XmlHttpRequest.
I slightly prefer Java style myself because I think "GC" looks better
than "Gc", because Web APIs use Java style, and because Python does
(e.g. SimpleHTTPServer) and in general we've been following PEP 8. But
I don't feel strongly on this issue.
Thoughts/straw poll?
Patrick
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
