Phango - questions

[Kris]

"Bill Baxter" <dnewsgroup at billbaxter.com>
> Yes, newcomers.  4 is less than 10.  That makes you newcomers relative to 
> phobos and the D style guide Walter has had posted up on digitalmars.com 
> that I presume is about as old as phobos.  That's all I meant.

Oh that's easy to answer: we understood those to be guidelines only, and 
felt that some minor details would need adjustment for our purposes. I 
recall there was some technical difficulty regarding module names at the 
time, but don't recall the specifics right now.


>> As for conventions, it is my opinion that Tango doesn't have to justify 
>> the choices made to anyone at this point. It's water under the bridge, 
>> just as the some minor stylistic choices in phobos or D are now just 
>> water under the bridge. As Walter already noted: Tango can use whatever 
>> style it wants.
>
> Yes, Tango can use whatever style it wants, but obviously some choices are 
> better than others.  Nobody here is arguing that RanDoM CaSE for module 
> names would be a good thing, for instance.

Are you sure about that? :p


>> moving along, I believe Sean's two questions (posted much earlier, which 
>> I repeated on his behalf) were intended to elicit some positive feedback?
>
> Yes.  I do wish certain parties would stick to the issues here.
> Elsewhere in this thread some constructive points have been mentioned pro 
> and con lowercase module names.  I'll try to summarize without injecting 
> any biases:

The effort is appreciated Bill, but realistically, Tango is not going to 
change in this manner. As has been noted several times prior, one persons 
stylistic meat is another's stylistic poison. There's no resolving that, and 
we have no wish to attempt to. It's a dilemma, and the kind of religious 
distinction that people would kill each other for in the past (and still do, 
actually).

Certain individuals cannot see past that, and find bitter resentment in the 
use of the shift-key here and there. Yet, the same folks are staying quiet 
about toString() and so on. Let's face it, function/method names are used 
more often than import names for example. So, I feel (a) this issue is daft 
and/or myopic to begin with (b) there's nothing that could be done without 
upsetting the stylistic preferences of others (c) there's little value in 
paying heed to the opinion of those who "refuse" to use a library simply 
because it doesn't adhere to one tiny stylistic notion, which couldn't in 
practice be changed anyway. Better for us to listen to people who are 
willing to be a little flexible.

Cheers;