Hirohito Higashi wrote: > Hi Bram and list, > > I think The following built-in functions names visibility not good. > jsonencode() > jsondecode() > jsencode() > jsdecode() > > I suggest that we rename these function names to: > json_encode() > json_decode() > js_encode() > js_decode() > > Somehow, I wrote a patch. > > I think possible in time. :-) > How about this?
Now that we have some functions with a common prefix, it seems to work quite well. The older way of having read_xxx(), write_xxx(), check_xxx() makes functions scatter. xxx_read(), xxx_write() and xxx_check() looks better, easier to find what you are looking for. Anything against it? -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: 225. You sign up for free subscriptions for all the computer magazines /// Bram Moolenaar -- [email protected] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.org /// \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org /// -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
