Re: [Vala] Methods/ctors overloading

[Frederik <scumm_fredo gmx net>]

Andrés G. Aragoneses wrote:
> Ok, that's a good argument against this automatic naming system, so I
> would advocate for a compiler error instead of a warning in this case
> (so the error advices about making the member private/internal, or
> adding the ExposeName -you name it- attribute).
>
> Andres

I could live with it if an [ExposeName] attribute was mandatory for
public methods. But in this case the developer would still have to be
creative for public method naming, of course. Only the usage of these
methods would be shorter (however, not necessarily clearer). By the way,
named constructors are so nice that developers try to emulate them in
other languages with static methods to express semantic differences:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/More_C%2B%2B_Idioms/Named_Constructor

I would probably avoid method/constructor overloading even if Vala
supported it. And it might be confusing if Vala supported both
constructor overloading and named constructors. But named constructors
can't be dropped because they allow for different constructors with same
signature which would not be possible with constructor overloading only
but is used by some GObject libraries.


Best regards,

Frederik