Re: 4x4
On 8 January 2015 at 21:16, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote: On 1/8/15 11:48 AM, Johannes Pfau wrote: Am Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:50:10 -0800 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org: On 1/8/15 9:16 AM, Kiith-Sa wrote: This is a problem with naming, not with DDox. It would look bad regardless of generator, or regardless of documentation at all. You could make it look slightly less bad, but you might end up hurting other documentation. (I'm not implying it should be renamed (bad reason for breaking compatibility), but I see no point in changing doc generation just because of some bad naming.) Sigh. No matter how I look at it, the same name repeated FOUR times only evokes Java's factory factory etc. -- Andrei These 4x digest variants never occur in real code though: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.digest.html is a class member function. You never use the full name, it's always instance.digest() http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.html could be used with the full name. But ironically the name is not used outside of std.digest so it's usually not necessary to use the full name. So it doesn't look nice in the docs but it's not a huge problem when writing code. This is a matter common with words that are both noun and verb. Let's have a Digest object that digests stuff. I think the review should have prompted a name change. -- Andrei Something that I noticed, having blue as the class=prettyprint lang-d colour was not a good idea for all things (see the copyright information at the bottom). http://dlang.org/library/std/math/tan.html
Re: 4x4
On 1/7/15 2:09 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.html Ugh. -- Andrei I remember this from the movie being std.digest when digest goes through the tunnel and becomes himself. -Steve
Re: 4x4
On Wednesday, 7 January 2015 at 07:09:01 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.html Ugh. -- Andrei This thread needs more digest: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.digest.html
Re: 4x4
On 1/8/15 4:46 AM, aldanor wrote: On Wednesday, 7 January 2015 at 07:09:01 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.html Ugh. -- Andrei This thread needs more digest: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.digest.html Heh. Alright, any lieutenant who could get on this? There's a sense of urgency - these pages are live now. Andrei
Re: 4x4
Am Thu, 08 Jan 2015 08:27:50 -0800 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org: On 1/8/15 8:19 AM, Johannes Pfau wrote: What kind of action would you expect? Renaming a name which has been used for two years now without complaints, simply because it looks bad in the new documentation? As we usually don't rename functions with inconsistent naming or otherwise bad names because of backwards compatibility (TM) I guess that's not what you want. OTOH I'm not sure if ddox could be much improved in this regard. Maybe it shouldn't display the full name, only Class.member. But I don't really know what you expect. I was thinking along the way of simplifying documentation and links. -- Andrei I guess that should be done by somebody familiar with the ddox codebase then. Two small improvements that could help: * Make names/filenames case sensitive * display only shortened names (Class.member, Module.member) This leaves the URL/link problem but I don't know how that could be solved.
Re: 4x4
On Thursday, 8 January 2015 at 16:27:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 1/8/15 8:19 AM, Johannes Pfau wrote: What kind of action would you expect? Renaming a name which has been used for two years now without complaints, simply because it looks bad in the new documentation? As we usually don't rename functions with inconsistent naming or otherwise bad names because of backwards compatibility (TM) I guess that's not what you want. OTOH I'm not sure if ddox could be much improved in this regard. Maybe it shouldn't display the full name, only Class.member. But I don't really know what you expect. I was thinking along the way of simplifying documentation and links. -- Andrei This is a problem with naming, not with DDox. It would look bad regardless of generator, or regardless of documentation at all. You could make it look slightly less bad, but you might end up hurting other documentation. (I'm not implying it should be renamed (bad reason for breaking compatibility), but I see no point in changing doc generation just because of some bad naming.)
Re: 4x4
On 1/8/15 8:19 AM, Johannes Pfau wrote: What kind of action would you expect? Renaming a name which has been used for two years now without complaints, simply because it looks bad in the new documentation? As we usually don't rename functions with inconsistent naming or otherwise bad names because of backwards compatibility (TM) I guess that's not what you want. OTOH I'm not sure if ddox could be much improved in this regard. Maybe it shouldn't display the full name, only Class.member. But I don't really know what you expect. I was thinking along the way of simplifying documentation and links. -- Andrei
Re: 4x4
Am Thu, 08 Jan 2015 07:44:17 -0800 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org: On 1/8/15 4:46 AM, aldanor wrote: On Wednesday, 7 January 2015 at 07:09:01 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.html Ugh. -- Andrei This thread needs more digest: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.digest.html Heh. Alright, any lieutenant who could get on this? There's a sense of urgency - these pages are live now. Andrei What kind of action would you expect? Renaming a name which has been used for two years now without complaints, simply because it looks bad in the new documentation? As we usually don't rename functions with inconsistent naming or otherwise bad names because of backwards compatibility (TM) I guess that's not what you want. OTOH I'm not sure if ddox could be much improved in this regard. Maybe it shouldn't display the full name, only Class.member. But I don't really know what you expect.
Re: 4x4
On 1/8/15 9:16 AM, Kiith-Sa wrote: This is a problem with naming, not with DDox. It would look bad regardless of generator, or regardless of documentation at all. You could make it look slightly less bad, but you might end up hurting other documentation. (I'm not implying it should be renamed (bad reason for breaking compatibility), but I see no point in changing doc generation just because of some bad naming.) Sigh. No matter how I look at it, the same name repeated FOUR times only evokes Java's factory factory etc. -- Andrei
Re: 4x4
On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 10:50:10AM -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d wrote: On 1/8/15 9:16 AM, Kiith-Sa wrote: This is a problem with naming, not with DDox. It would look bad regardless of generator, or regardless of documentation at all. You could make it look slightly less bad, but you might end up hurting other documentation. (I'm not implying it should be renamed (bad reason for breaking compatibility), but I see no point in changing doc generation just because of some bad naming.) Sigh. No matter how I look at it, the same name repeated FOUR times only evokes Java's factory factory etc. -- Andrei Yes, good ole Java verbosity with class Chocolate, class ChocolateFactory, class ChocolateFactoryFactory, class ChocolateWrapper, class ChocolateWrapperFactory, class ChocolateWrapperFactoryFactoryWrapper, ad nauseaum. Utterly delicious. /sarcasm :-P T -- It won't be covered in the book. The source code has to be useful for something, after all. -- Larry Wall
Re: 4x4
Am Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:50:10 -0800 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org: On 1/8/15 9:16 AM, Kiith-Sa wrote: This is a problem with naming, not with DDox. It would look bad regardless of generator, or regardless of documentation at all. You could make it look slightly less bad, but you might end up hurting other documentation. (I'm not implying it should be renamed (bad reason for breaking compatibility), but I see no point in changing doc generation just because of some bad naming.) Sigh. No matter how I look at it, the same name repeated FOUR times only evokes Java's factory factory etc. -- Andrei These 4x digest variants never occur in real code though: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.digest.html is a class member function. You never use the full name, it's always instance.digest() http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.html could be used with the full name. But ironically the name is not used outside of std.digest so it's usually not necessary to use the full name. So it doesn't look nice in the docs but it's not a huge problem when writing code.
Re: 4x4
On 1/8/15 11:48 AM, Johannes Pfau wrote: Am Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:50:10 -0800 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org: On 1/8/15 9:16 AM, Kiith-Sa wrote: This is a problem with naming, not with DDox. It would look bad regardless of generator, or regardless of documentation at all. You could make it look slightly less bad, but you might end up hurting other documentation. (I'm not implying it should be renamed (bad reason for breaking compatibility), but I see no point in changing doc generation just because of some bad naming.) Sigh. No matter how I look at it, the same name repeated FOUR times only evokes Java's factory factory etc. -- Andrei These 4x digest variants never occur in real code though: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.digest.html is a class member function. You never use the full name, it's always instance.digest() http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.html could be used with the full name. But ironically the name is not used outside of std.digest so it's usually not necessary to use the full name. So it doesn't look nice in the docs but it's not a huge problem when writing code. This is a matter common with words that are both noun and verb. Let's have a Digest object that digests stuff. I think the review should have prompted a name change. -- Andrei
Re: 4x4
On 1/8/15 12:01 PM, eles wrote: On Thursday, 8 January 2015 at 16:19:44 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote: Am Thu, 08 Jan 2015 07:44:17 -0800 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org: On 1/8/15 4:46 AM, aldanor wrote: On Wednesday, 7 January 2015 at 07:09:01 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: What kind of action would you expect? Renaming a name which has been used for two years now without complaints, simply because it looks bad in the new documentation? I would like to see that wheel start rolling, though. On my personal list: std.uni - std.unicode stripLeft - stripFront stripRight - stripBack Let's leave these alone, thanks. -- Andrei
Re: 4x4
On Thursday, 8 January 2015 at 16:19:44 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote: Am Thu, 08 Jan 2015 07:44:17 -0800 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org: On 1/8/15 4:46 AM, aldanor wrote: On Wednesday, 7 January 2015 at 07:09:01 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: What kind of action would you expect? Renaming a name which has been used for two years now without complaints, simply because it looks bad in the new documentation? I would like to see that wheel start rolling, though. On my personal list: std.uni - std.unicode stripLeft - stripFront stripRight - stripBack
