Re: Small cleanup in fn-financial.c

[Jody Goldberg <jody gnome org>]

On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 10:16:44PM +0000, Neil Booth wrote:
> Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:-
> > I believe we should wait with `cleaning up' the code until these 
> > functions work flawlessly.
> Cleaning up is good to do anytime
I tend to agree this cleanup will make our lives easier down the
line.  I'll put the patch in, with the renaming below .  Having only
1 version to fix will help.

> I don't think there's much point trying to fluff the functions up too
> much; despite their attempts to appear otherwise they are really
> U.S.-specific, and a proper bond analytics implementation would not
> have an exposed interface anything like what Excel has.
It is true that XL's interface to fixed income analytics has very
little real use.  However, to me that suggests that we make the XL
functions a compatible as possible, and work in parallel on a more
useful set of routines.
 
> > Moreover, the name gnumeric_coupcd is misleading since all the
> > gnumeric_ procedures should correspond to implemented functions.
>
> OK.  I don't have any good ideas for another name.  coup_cd_wrapper
> maybe?
Within the function files we use the 'gnumeric_' prefix to indicate
actual wrapper.  We've not had many instances of shared wrappers.
How about 
    func_coupcd ?