Re: Binding convention for poorly named functions

[Torsten Schoenfeld <kaffeetisch web de>]

On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 22:43, muppet wrote:

>   # as a static method (consistent with how we've done things in the past)
>   Some::Naughty->function (other_object)

I think this would be a good compromise between "correct" and
"consistent".

To clarify:  There are not going to be many functions that need this
special treatment.  Most likely only some esoteric stuff in gdk, because
that's where most of the unbound API can be found -- besides pango, that
is, but pango has a very well designed API and I do not expect to find
problematic functions.

Bye,
-Torsten