| 123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627 |
- My style of function naming may seem a little bit odd (and, I would agree) but
- there is a method to the madness that I will try and explain here for you all:
- I'm making an attempt to modularize as many datastructures as I can, making it
- so people can only interact with them through the header files; I'm guessing it
- will cut down on bugs by forcing people to reuse already existing functions
- instead of writing their own, which are known to (hopefully) work correctly.
- I've tried to distinguish between functions designed to interact directly with
- datastructures (e.g. get and set methods) and those that actually have some
- functionality to them (e.g. sending messages to sockets, combat routines, etc)
- by using different casing. Functions that are deisgned to interact directly
- with a datastructure are in CamelCase and everything else is in snakey_case.
- For functions in CamelCase, functions should take a naming syntax like:
- [datatype][routine][target] (e.g. roomGetName, roomRead). The exception is
- for creating and deleting datastructures. For doing these things, it is always
- [new | delete][datatye] (e.g. newList, deleteChar).
- Hopefully this will explain the seemingly odd programming style you see in my
- code. Undoubtedly, this is a very bad convention to use (I would be better off
- using one type of casing or the other) but that's life, I guess. Perhaps in a
- later version, I will go through and redo the function naming conventions.
- Geoff Hollis
- hollisgf@email.uc.edu
- http://www.uc.edu/~hollisgf/
|
