On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 05:39 PM 9/19/2001 -0700, Paul Prescod wrote:
> >If one presumes that Parrot is going to be so much nicer than the
> >current Perl internals that many more people will be interested in it,
> >then maybe it makes sense to make names as readable as possible, even if
> >they are not what Perl historically used.
> >
> >I propose, for example, "intval" for IV and "floatval" for NV.
>
> The only problem with those is they're so long, and I'm lazy. :)
>
I get the fact that your joking, still... (to respond to the initial
message more likely ;)))
I'm for the idea of being quite explicit (but not overly explicit :), otherwise
when it comes to new people learning the source code, it makes the bar
considerably higher, and naturally all lazy programmers prefer other people to
do the work for them :)
For example, which of the following two might make sense to the "new" programmer:
char *name = SvPV(p1);
or:
char *name = SV_STRVAL(p1);
to me, the second would make more sense (PV, Pointer Value, what are
these incantations? :)
-Sterling
