devel_glfw3.1: incorrect renaming of Char to Character?

[slimsag]

It looks like we renamed these functions spelling out Char as Character.

For example glfwSetCharCallback -> SetCharacterCallback spelled out fully. We did it with SetCharacterModsCallback too.

This isn't a big deal but it seems rather inconsistent I think. What say you guys?

[tapir]

I don't remember the reasoning behind it but it seems inconsistent with GLFW API.
Sometimes there are name collisions between funcs and structs and in those cases I might have done this to prevent the collision but this is not the case here.

My guess is that, fully spelled version is more Go-like and readable. If there is strong opinion to follow GFLW API strictly I'm not against it.

[slimsag]

I see. Thanks for the prompt response!

If there is strong opinion to follow GFLW API strictly I'm not against it.

My main argument is that, unless there is a good reason, it is a needless place where someone who has used the C API (or any other language bindings, I guess) would possibly trip.

[dmitshur]

I think it's better just to keep the spelling the same as GLFW C library. Unless there are very pressing (more so than just better sounding name) reasons to do otherwise.

[dmitshur]

I will make a PR that changes the naming to be consistent with GLFW names. Let me know if there are any objections, but I think that's the best thing to do.

[dmitshur]

Just a thought,

someone who has used the C API (or any other language bindings, I guess) would possibly trip.

Isn't that unlikely since Go is statically typed, and there's godoc.org and likely autocompletion available? If someone tries to write window.SetCharCallback(...), they'll get an error:

./main.go:123: window.SetCharCallback undefined (type *glfw3.Window has no field or method SetCharCallback)

Then they'll go godoc.org and see that it's called something else. Or, more likely, they'll be looking at godoc.org to begin with (how else do they have a window, etc.), or their autocompletion will suggest aracterCallback when they type window.SetChar:

Nevertheless, I still believe sticking with original upstream API func names where possible is simpler/better. Even if resolving this inconsistency is easy, it's better if it doesn't exist in the first place. Also, porting code will be easier as there'll be less manual/irregular changes.

Making a PR to close this issue now.

[slimsag]

Closing this as the PR has been merged into the devel_glfw3.1 branch.