[racket] raco command naming convention

From: Neil Van Dyke (neil at neilvandyke.org)
Date: Sat Dec 24 19:54:46 EST 2011

Regarding adding "raco" commands, any opinions on whether long command 
names are appropriate?

For example, assuming that I have a package, called McFly, that defines 
a few "raco" commands, which of the following is preferred?

1. raco update-mcfly-dev-links

2. raco mcfly update-dev-links

That is, should the McFly package add multiple "raco" commands with long 
names, or should it add a single "raco" command with multiple subcommands?

An advantage of adding "raco" commands with long names is that they show 
up in "raco help".  Secondarily, "raco help" output could be used to 
complete "raco" command names, although this alone wouldn't give it 
enough information to complete arguments after the command name.

Another advantage of the long names is that it's a single namespace, is 
that, if multiple packages are adding operations, the user only has to 
remember a sensible name for the operation, not which package/command 
unver which each operation is effectively categorized.  (Analogous to 
how we generally use variable names in Racket.)

A disadvantage of the long names is that they push the formatting of 
"raco help" output wider.


Posted on the users mailing list.