On Thursday, October 13, 2016 22:55:00 Julien Bect wrote:
...
In fact, the "gsl_sf_" prefix is removed. For instance :
"gsl_sf_clausen" is made available as "clausen".
I see two difficulties with this naming scheme :
a) Name conflicts. Some GSL functions names would coincide with Octave
function names. This problem has been solved in earlier release of the
GSL package by adding a "_gsl" suffix, but this makes the naming scheme
inconsistent.
b) Short names. Some function names become very short and look like
variable names. For instance, "gsl_sf_eta" becomes "eta", "gsl_sf_Si"
becomes "Si"... I am not comfortable with such short names.
I propose to keep full GSL names to solve both problems.
Any opinions ?
@++
Julien
Agreed, full GSL names would be much better.