From: Trans <transfire@...>
Date: 2005-09-09T13:41:29+09:00
Subject: Re: nano & mega


Florian Gro� wrote:
> Trans wrote:
>
> > So foo-bang, foo-p, foo-set, and class-foo, plus I might as well do:
> >
> >      {
> >        "+"	=> "op-plus",
> >        "-"	=> "op-minus",
> >        "+@"	=> "op-plus-self",
> >        "-@"	=> "op-minus-self",
> > [...]
> >      }
> >
> > I thik also I'd like to reduce all of them to a single dash if
> > reasonably possible, which would change a few of them.
> >
> > What do you think of this?
>
> Let me give a late okay to this. My mapping was initially for going from
> method names to names for test methods so using - was no option for me.
> It makes sense here and helps with avoiding collisions.

Thank you, Florian! And yet your luck perhaps is even better. I decided
just to be a little bit loosey-goosey on this last issue and simply
remove any trailing punctuation marks. Yes, that means #first? and
#first! are in the same file, first.rb. While not ideal, this bit of a
fudge seems reasonable and managable. In many cases it is actually
preferable (eg. string/dresner and string/dresner!) And that way I can
use the 'op_' as a reserved prefix. For class methods I put those in a
tertiary subdir 'self', eg. 'nano/file/self/read_list' (think "def
self.read_list")

And btw I'm currently using your op-to-english table as is.

> What was the motivation for this? Sure: It is mostly transparent if you
> use the custom require or escaping functionality you provide, but what
> if I want to do a patch for a file or have a look at the implementation
> of something? Here it really helps if the files are intuitively named.

Thanks, I agree. While I had tried english names before, it didn't work
b/c I did not use consistant names. Your consitant naming scheme works
well. I have already found it easier to use.

You can look foward to the change in the next release, which should be
farily soon.

Thanks again,
T.