Re: Binding convention for poorly named functions

["muppet" <scott asofyet org>]

James Curbo said:
> Torsten Schoenfeld wrote:
> | As risky as it might be, I'd vote for keeping up the method approach
> | simply for the sake of consistency.  And for changing all those bad boys
> | to helper functions in Gtk3.
>
> This gets my vote, for the same reasons. It would be utterly confusing
> to newbies to have some functions as helpers and some as methods. I do
> totally support splitting them out in the next major version, however.

The rebuttal is, of course, that it is sacrificing maintainability and
correctness for consistency.  In the future, if a new method pops up in the
namespace in which we've squatted, we will be screwed and forced into an API
change, which is worse than being inconsistent.

So, clearly, i cannot choose the wine in front of you.[1]

Doing the wrong thing to avoid surprising newbies seems rather dubious; it's
going with PoLS from the uninitiated side (it acts like the others), but
violating it from the other side (it isn't actually what it says it is).

We will be stuck with any broken APIs until gtk+-3.0 and Gtk3, and there's no
telling how far away that is.  They already have plans for gtk+-2.6, there may
be 2.8 and even 2.10 for all we know.


[1] Sorry, i can't speak without movie references today.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0093779/


-- 
muppet <scott at asofyet dot org>