On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Steven Schveighoffer
<schvei...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 07:09:17 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer
> <schvei...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 14:39:28 -0500, Jose Armando Garcia
>> <jsan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, March 06, 2012 09:14:16 so wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, 6 March 2012 at 07:46:14 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>>>> > On 2012-03-06 02:32, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > The user can then alias "log!info" to "info" if he/she wants to.
>>>>>
>>>>> Again, you are now forcing 2 common names instead of one as it is
>>>>> now.
>>>>> When you instantiate log!info where do you get "info" from?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes. My mistake - probably because the time stuff typicall takes such a
>>>> template argument as string, which would make this log!"info"(msg).
>>>> However,
>>>> adding _log_ isn't necessarily bad, given that this is std.log that
>>>> we're
>>>> talking about. It's info and the rest that are the problem.
>>>>
>>> Seriously everyone. What are we spending some much effort on this?
>>
>>
>> Because naming is important. It's very difficult to change names once
>> something is released. I seriously could care less about implementation
>> (didn't even look at it). That can be fixed. Naming can't.
>>
>>> What is wrong with:
>>>
>>> import log = std.log;
>>> log.info("cool");
>>
>>
>> What is wrong with
>>
>> import std.log;
>> log.info("cool");
>
>
> alternatively:
>
> log_info("cool");
> linfo("cool");
> lginfo("cool");
>
> There are so many choices besides just "info." We should use something
> else.
>
Lets flip the question. Why are you against:
import log = std.log;
Thanks,
-Jose
> -Steve
