Regarding adding "raco" commands, any opinions on whether long command
names are appropriate?
For example, assuming that I have a package, called McFly, that defines
a few "raco" commands, which of the following is preferred?
1. raco update-mcfly-dev-links
2. raco mcfly update-dev-links
That is, should the McFly package add multiple "raco" commands with long
names, or should it add a single "raco" command with multiple subcommands?
An advantage of adding "raco" commands with long names is that they show
up in "raco help". Secondarily, "raco help" output could be used to
complete "raco" command names, although this alone wouldn't give it
enough information to complete arguments after the command name.
Another advantage of the long names is that it's a single namespace, is
that, if multiple packages are adding operations, the user only has to
remember a sensible name for the operation, not which package/command
unver which each operation is effectively categorized. (Analogous to
how we generally use variable names in Racket.)
A disadvantage of the long names is that they push the formatting of
"raco help" output wider.
--
http://www.neilvandyke.org/
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
