On 3/11/2012 8:34 AM, deadalnix wrote:
I do think better name isn't the problem. The problem is about consistency, and
will persist as long as we don't agree on a guideline on that in phobos.
Changing a name just for changing it doesn't worth the cost, unless the original
name is horribly misleading - rare case. But getting the naming convention
consistent is of much greater importance, and justify breaking code.
Frankly, I think naming conventions are overrated. The problem is that, as the
sec vs seconds debate shows, there is not a correct answer. It becomes a
bikeshed issue. There are a lot of considerations for a name, usually
conflicting with each other. To set rules in concrete and follow them no matter
what is a formula for silly results.
I'm not suggesting no naming convention. Naming conventions are good. But they
don't trump everything else in importance, not even close.
And sometimes, a name change can be a huge win - the invariant=>immutable one is
an example. But I think that's an exceptional case, not a rule.