On 01/19/2011 12:56 PM, bearophile wrote:
spir:
Because when a module defines a type Foo (or rather, it's what is
exported), I like it to be called Foo.d.
Generally D modules contain many types.
Yep, but often one is the main exported element. When there are several,
hopefully sensibly related, exported things, then it's easy to indicate:
mathFuncs, stringTools, bitOps... while still following D naming
conventions.
Was it me or you who heavily & repetedly insisted on the importance of
consistent style, in particular naming, in a programming community (I
strongly support you on this point). Why should modules not benefit of this?
For sure, there are case-insensitive filesystems, but only prevents
using _in the same dir_ (or package) module names that differ only on
case. I guess.
Denis
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com
