From: Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
Date: 2003-01-28T08:59:43+09:00
Subject: Re: ruby-dev summary 19380-19436

On Tuesday, January 28, 2003, 10:41:36 AM, TAKAHASHI wrote:

>   [ruby-dev:19387] standard ruby lib coding convension

> NaHi asked to Matz for coding convension for standard
> ruby library. Matz recommended to:

>   * use two-space indentation, no TABs
>   * use RDoc
>   * use camelCase for variable names and method names
>   * use camelCase for class names and module names
>   * use upper case separated by '_' for constants

The standard library at the moment uses CamelCase for classes and
modules and this_kind_of_case for methods and variables.  Is that
about to change?


>   [ruby-dev:19423] Numeric#quo

> Matz announced that he implemented quotient method
> Numric#quo. This method returns accurate value
> as much as possible, using class Rational.

>   ex. 3.quo(2) => 3/2 (Rational)

> There are some issues remained.

>  * Is the method name 'quo' appropriate?

Good enough for me.  3.over(2) sounds natural but might be a bit
colloquial.

>  * Should we make Rational into standard?

That would be nice, barring potential portability issues.

>  * Does int.quo(float) and rational.quo(float) return
>    Rational or Float?
  
These should be equivalent to Rational(a, b).  I don't know how that
behaves, but hopefully it's well thought out.


Gavin