[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: list3i etc.
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: list3i etc. |
Date: |
Thu, 07 Mar 2013 11:23:12 +0200 |
> Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 12:58:09 +0400
> From: Dmitry Antipov <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden
>
> On 03/07/2013 11:01 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> >> Can we have a more mnemonically significant names for these, please?
> >> Like list_of_numbers2, list_of_numbers3, etc., for example?
>
> Of course we can. But IMHO they're "mnemonically significant" already,
Obviously, I disagree. The names list2, list3 etc. _are_ good for
mnemonics, because all they do is construct lists of N members. But
what is the 'i' part is completely obfuscated, IMO.
If the length of the name is a factor, then I can suggest list_ints2,
list_ints3 etc.
> and the similar approach is widely used here and there. For example,
> OpenGL API uses glFoo[sifd] to denote versions of glFoo with short/int/
> float/double arguments.
That others sin similarly shouldn't stop us from doing TRT ;-)
> > Also, why are they implemented as inline functions? They call list,
> > list3, etc. which aren't inlined.
>
> Hm... I guess that we don't want function call overhead for such a simple
> things
Why not? Are these used in any context where speed matters?
Re: list3i etc., Stefan Monnier, 2013/03/08