[racket-dev] consistency in names and signatures

From: ozzloy-racket-dev (ozzloy+dev_racket-lang_org at gmail.com)
Date: Wed Apr 4 12:22:40 EDT 2012

along the consistency in function naming vein:
file-name-from-path versus filename-extension.  is "filename" 1 word or 2?
 i prefer 1.

even more tangential, why isn't file-name-from-path "path->filename"
instead?  or even "basename"?

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 08:07, David T. Pierson <dtp at mindstory.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:44:35AM -0400, David T. Pierson wrote:
> > (Presumably if equally concise names that better reflected function
> > signatures were available, they would have been used in the first
> > place.)
> Sorry for the double post.  I should have added "equally lucid" along
> with "equally concise".
> Perhaps what I should have asked was simply whether there exist names
> that better indicate function signatures but are still good in all or
> most other important aspects, and whether it is worth breaking
> compatibility for such.
> David
> _________________________
>  Racket Developers list:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/attachments/20120404/f906f2af/attachment.html>

Posted on the dev mailing list.