New naming convention

[JayArby]

That said, if you want to I will happily concede to the expression "Abominable English" for the US bastardisation of the source language.

You're just jealous of American English.

[minirop]

JayArby > a quote I love :

there is no such thing as 'American English'. There is English and there are mistakes.

anyway, I'm used to "Color" because everybody use it. (except Ogre3D for what I know)

[Groogy]

Well for programming I use the "US Dialect" of English but when writing/talking I tend to use the normal British English. Though I don't know I'm not native to the language so might be that I actually mix them both without even knowing it.

[JayArby]

JayArby > a quote I love :

there is no such thing as 'American English'. There is English and there are mistakes.

anyway, I'm used to "Color" because everybody use it. (except Ogre3D for what I know)

Yeah, I was using the qualifier 'American' to designate the version of English without the mistakes.

Okay, I'm just trolling now.  :lol: I actually don't care at all whether anyone prefers one dialect over the other.

[Dravere]

Why is C# using PascalCase and the majority of the libraries in C# are using PascalCase? If camelCase would be that much better, they would have switched or at least the userbase would have switched.

Let me turn that around: why does the Java naming convention explicitly endorse camelCase and every Java library follows it? If it was that bad, they would have switched...

You missed my point there. I said the people are using the naming convention of the standard library. In C# the standard library is using PascalCase. In Java the standard library is using camelCase.

In most languages the people are using the naming convention of the corresponding standard library. C++ is the big exception.

[Silvah]

Well, let's not start a debate here, but do you know why it's called English? Because it came from England/Britain.

It's called English, because the people among whom it emerged were called Angles, after the region they came from, namely Angeln, which lies in Schleswig-Holstein, northern Germany. It's hardly England, you know

[Spidyy]

Well, let's not start a debate here, but do you know why it's called English? Because it came from England/Britain.

It's called English, because the people among whom it emerged were called Angles, after the region they came from, namely Angeln, which lies in Schleswig-Holstein, northern Germany. It's hardly England, you know

* Did learn something interresting today. *

[OniLinkPlus]

Well, let's not start a debate here, but do you know why it's called English? Because it came from England/Britain.

It's called English, because the people among whom it emerged were called Angles, after the region they came from, namely Angeln, which lies in Schleswig-Holstein, northern Germany. It's hardly England, you know

Today I learned!

[Nexus]

By the way, how are the STL compatibility functions going to be named? begin() and end() are strictly speaking inconsistent, as they're missing "get"

The real problem however is, those standard iteration loops mostly use the iterator or const_iterator member type, at least in C++98 without type inference. So only providing begin() and end() isn't enough.

Code: [Select]

for (Container::iterator itr = c.begin(); itr != c.end(); ++itr)
But if sf::String and sf::VertexArray use iterator and const_iterator instead of Iterator and ConstIterator, you will have multiple naming conventions in your public API again

[Oberon]

SFML has to provide iterator and const_iterator, otherwise the containers will not be usable in BOOST_FOREACH or the C++11 range based for loops ("foreach loops").
I propose to follow the Qt way here and provide both, one of them as typedef.

[Laurent]

SFML has to provide iterator and const_iterator, otherwise the containers will not be usable in BOOST_FOREACH or the C++11 range based for loops ("foreach loops")

As far as I know, both can rely on non-member begin/end functions too.

I think that begin() and end() won't be renamed, people are used to these functions and it would be really strange to give them different names. As far as I know, all other libraries that use "get" for getters do the same.

I don't know what to do with iterator types. Qt defines both but I personally always use Iterator/ConstIterator because it's consistent with other Qt types.

[BMB]

I hate to sound impatient or annoying, but since it seems that you have decided and already have the changes done by you, can we expect them to be  committed soon?

[Laurent]

Nop, I'm first finishing to update the bindings (to the new graphics API), which takes much time.

And the changes are done but I need to restore the get/is prefixes, which will also take quite a lot of time.

[Tank]

And the changes are done but I need to restore the get/is prefixes, which will also take quite a lot of time.

I thought you use Git? Hopefully you're not of the sort of people committing changes only each 7 days.

[Laurent]

I thought you use Git? Hopefully you're not of the sort of people committing changes only each 7 days.

I switched from "PascalCase with get" to "camelCase without get", in a single commit. So now I need to add "get" prefixes.