| Re: [AD] Renamed API third draft |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 09:59:17AM +0100, Hein Zelle wrote:
> That had had indeed escaped my attention. I think it is not fair
> reasoning though to adapt line() and circle() because do_line and
> do_circle are not clear.
It _is_ fair in order to have name heterogeneity, which is broken with
such concesions for lazy typing. <rant> The drawing functions are not
the only ones showing this problem: what will you do with draw_character,
draw_sprite, draw_rle_sprite, etc? According to your suggesiton you would
end up having: al_character, al_sprite, al_rle_sprite, etc, which are
of course clear to understand in any context, and you will save several
hours of work every day because you typed them faster than before. </rant>
I know I sound stubborn, stupid and pedantic, but this is really a choice
to do: you either keep the draw_ prefix or don't, doing concessions
only harms the API as a whole, it makes it more difficult to learn to
new people, especially non-english speakers.
Long time ago I used to promote and defend Allegro as multiplatform
game programming choice everywhere. Usually people didn't like Allegro
because: a) they thought Allegro was still only for DOS, b) they laughed
about the API names, usually answering with obscene words about to what
was Shawn thinking of when he chose function names (ie: textout, alert3,
arc, exists). I could fight against a) with examples and documentation,
nothing could be done for b).
However, I don't know why I'm defending the name of a function which
I've never used myself in games before :) I just give up, let Eric decide.
> (except for one remark: why use Al_Func and not just AlFunc?)
Well, of course, it's your custom define. David A. Capello could write
his own al_bpp, I would define CB for clear_bitmap, etc, etc... everything
is possible in such a wonderful world :)
--
Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz gradha@xxxxxxxxxx http://gradha.infierno.org/