[+ guile-devel, in case they have an opinion on the spelling of frame-data-read-register vs frame-data:read-register]
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Andy Wingo <[email protected]> wrote: >> As to the class of an object passed to a sniffer, how about calling it >> FrameData? Note that it's not very important from the user's point of >> view as sniffer code does not ever reference it by name. > > It's true that from user code it barely matters to Python, but Scheme's > monomorphic flavor makes these things more apparent: > > (frame-data-read-register frame "r0") > > This doesn't read so well to me -- is it "read-register" on a > "frame-data", or is it "data-read-register" on a "frame" ? A weak point > but "ephemeral-frame-read-register" avoids the question. As food for discussion, I know some people use foo:bar in Scheme to separate the object "foo" from the operation on it "bar". -> frame-data:read-register I like having some separator, but I went with what I thought was the preferred spelling (all -'s). It's not too late to change gdb/guile to use foo:bar throughout (IMO), but the door is closing.
