Re: [Ocaml-lib-devel] ExtLib v0.1o

[Manos R. <er...@cs...>]

On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 10:49:27AM +0900, Nicolas Cannasse wrote:
> > > > > Can we rename MList to something more descriptive, such as
> List_Mutable?
> > > >
> Main arguments against MList are :
> 
> 1) this is too short for COAN , can cause name clash
>     answer : we're writing a "standard" library, we have priority on module
> names (just after the official ones)
>     answer2 : there currently no COAN around
>     answer3 : the -pack compiler option can resolve such problems
> 
> 2) this is not understandable in the first sight
>     answer : why should it be ? I mean, if you're reading a Java program
> without knowing at least a bit of the JDK, you're not going to understand it
> like you would read an english text.
>     answer2 :  Programming is matter of syntax and semantic rules, keeping
> shortly named modules is helpful when reading problems as it keeps the
> source code compact.
>     answer3 : It's only a problem for beginners, and they can still look at
> the doc to see what is MList
> 
> Naming conflicts should be resolved by arguments, not by a vote.

As far as I can tell, the Caml practice is that to use longer
names, perhaps on the basis that there are ways to shorten them if
necessary. MList is not a bad name but the fact that it loses the
"Mutable" part is bothersome. If I'm reading somebody else's
code and I come across MList, I have to go look at the manual.
If I come across MutableList, the meaning is much clearer.
The meaning is also clear if the first line of the program is 
    module MList = MutableList
Since we have this wonderful mechanism to shorten names, 
I think it's a pity to use short names from the beginning and lose
all the (potential, or even questionable, if you like) advantages 
of long ones.

-- Manos