Re: [AD] SF.net SVN: alleg:[12071] allegro/branches/4.9

[Peter Wang <novalazy@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2009-04-14, Evert Glebbeek <eglebbk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 14 Apr 2009, at 9:28 , Thomas Fjellstrom wrote:
> > There is a reason I asked for input a long time ago. All these  
> > sudden changes
> > are a bit of a shock. Why was it fine before and now its somehow  
> > broken?
> 
> Don't take it personally.
> You implement something and at some point you (or someone else)  
> realises that there's a reason to change it - so they change it at  
> that point.

Elias and Evert have said it all already; thanks.

I'll add a bit anyway.  For me, fshooks (among other things) have always
been on the back burner.  It goes without saying, as we become satisfied
with the higher priority parts of the API, we'll eventually have to turn
our attention to previously neglected tasks.

We're supposedly aiming for a release this year.  All parts of the API
must be scrutinised, and it must be done soon.  That's why I'm looking
at fshooks now, and not earlier.  It's just a question of priorities
(and whatever's interesting at the time).

> > No one will be used to allegro's api, so they shouldn't find a  
> > different, more sane ordering /bad/.
> 
> The order is completely arbitrary (there is no reason one order should  
> be better than another, but it does somewhat depend on what you're  
> used to), so I would say the best thing to do is go with whatever the  
> "standard" convention is. Otherwise it gets confusing.

Yes, the principle of least surprise.

Peter