Re: [ggt-devel] another potential usability issue from naming

[Kevin M. <ke...@vr...>]

> 
> Not a book, but experience. When an object has a property, do you write a 
> set/make method pair to manipulate it or a set/get pair? What does the 
> industry standard tell you? What does any UML tool use while reverse 
> engineering a diagram from the code to determine an object's properties?
> 

might need a get for retrieval.  but we know all gets are actually sets... 
:)

and we also know the gets and sets don't return out the back (just because 
of how we chose to implement - object oriented C).

since you wanted it out the back as temporary, then it is make.  I can't 
remember what the original issue is anymore.  Does this clear it up?

just write a set( vec, mat ) and a set (mat, vec), and you'll be golden.
if you need a constructor, use "make"...  

The only way to have constructors in C, or the only way to decouple 
constructors from C++ objects is to have "make" functions.  Is it the 
naming you don't like?  I don't see the problem I guess...

kevin