> From: l...@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) > Cc: guile-user@gnu.org > >> > >> Yi DAI <plm....@gmail.com> writes: > >> > >>> I'd like to suggest the following name convention > >>> which complies to names commonly found in > >>> assembly languages. > >>> > >>> > >>> - Replace < (less than) with *_lt*. > >>> - Replace > (greater than) with *_gt*. > >> > > well, the API is controlled by the scheme steering committee, > > AIUI he's talking about the Scheme-to-C API mapping, which is not > controlled by "the committee".
Furthermore, I think the proposal has been over truncated. Original: > From: Yi DAI <plm....@gmail.com> > reference manual: > > - Replace < (less than) with _less. > - Replace > (greater than) with _gr. > > I'd like to suggest the following name convention So as I understand, the proposal is: Currently, the variables that Scheme programmers know as |<| and |>|, are called in C _less and _gr. Propose to rename the C variables so that |<| and |>| are called in C *_lt* and and *_gt*, respectively. I'm not sure whether the asterisks are meant to be part of the name. This seems good to me; what was the programmer thinking that made it seem good to have asymmetric identifers for |<| and |>|? The names .LT. and .GT. go back to the Fortran of the late fifties. Whether it is worth the trouble to change, I don't know, but if I were planning to use this more than once or twice, I would rename it myself in my own code. -- Keith
