[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Renaming muscles
From: |
Akim Demaille |
Subject: |
Re: Renaming muscles |
Date: |
09 Jul 2002 12:17:45 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Honest Recruiter) |
| > I must say I had that problem when I renamed them. My problem is that
| > I'm a prefix person (i.e., I much prefer rules_sth than sth_rule.
| > Then I prefered `number' since that closer to the names used in
| > internal.
| >
| > Nevertheless, I'm fine with changing these. But I'd prefer having
| > other opinions: should I use `states_count' etc?
|
| You mean for the types? I don't think so, from their names, I'd guess
| they really refer to a state's numeric ID; as such, state_number_t is a
| perfectly fine name.
Yes, I was really focusing on the issue you raised.
| For final_state_number etc., the _number suffix is probably not
| necessary;
I made this for consistency.
| final_state adequately reflects that this refers to the final state.
|
| In any case, it would be state_count, not states_count if it evaluated
| to
| the number of states in the machine.
Hm. So really, states_number is wrong? Well, you have the final
call:
- nstates
- number_of_states
- states_number_of
- states_number
- state_count
- Renaming muscles, Akim Demaille, 2002/07/03
- Re: Renaming muscles, Tim Van Holder, 2002/07/03
- Re: Renaming muscles, Akim Demaille, 2002/07/04
- Re: Renaming muscles, Tim Van Holder, 2002/07/04
- Re: Renaming muscles,
Akim Demaille <=
- Re: Renaming muscles, Tim Van Holder, 2002/07/12
- Re: Renaming muscles, Akim Demaille, 2002/07/12
- Re: Renaming muscles, Paul Eggert, 2002/07/13
- Re: Renaming muscles, Akim Demaille, 2002/07/16
- Re: Renaming muscles, Akim Demaille, 2002/07/17