We already had this discussion, and even had this version. It doesn't look as "C-like" as the other option, people hated it (myself included) and it was less flexible because you always had to put it in a variable instead of just create and immediately pack into a box (for example).
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri < barbi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:15 AM, <marcel-hollerb...@t-online.de> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 02:22:42PM +0100, Tom Hacohen wrote: > >> On 23/08/16 14:17, marcel-hollerb...@t-online.de wrote: > >> > Hello, > >> > > >> > i am not so happy with the name efl_self. > >> > > >> > Reason for that is that "self" is in the context of other languages > >> > completly different compared to our use in efl_add. > >> > People got confused by it, and used it wrong (We just had the case on > irc). > >> > And even if they get a error and see pretty quick that this will not > >> > work, they still think of the usage of self from other languages. > >> > > >> > So I would like to propose a name like efl_add_object, efl_add_obj, > >> > efl_added which really tells this only makes sense with efl_add, > >> > and does not use a keyword which is used different in other languages. > >> > > >> > Objections / Input ? > >> > > >> > >> I don't really care one way or the other, but just going to say what I > >> said before on IRC so both side of the argument are represented: > >> > >> Our usage of "self" is not completely different to other languages. We > >> use it to mean "self" just like every other language, but our scope > >> where it's allowed is smaller, only in eo_add(). > > > > I think the more dangerous part here is that eo_add(XYZ_CLASS, parent, > > func_set(efl_self)); does not really look like opening up "a new" scope, > > If you dont really know what eo_add is doing, then it looks like the > > result of func_set is passed in as a argument to efl_add. So efl_self > > does not really describe what it really is. > > > > Sure you will learn it, you will see it, earlier or later, but why > > making it hard to do/learn instead of just call it efl_added (or smth. > > like that) where it is more obvious to people that this is NOT what self > > is like in other languages. > > thinking about opening scope... why not change it completely, like: > > success = efl_add(var, class, ...); > > then: > > efl_add(o, cls, method(o)); would just work :-) > > > > -- > Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri > -------------------------------------- > Mobile: +55 (16) 99354-9890 > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
