Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use :: for library separation #80

Closed
hhorak opened this issue Apr 23, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Use :: for library separation #80

hhorak opened this issue Apr 23, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@hhorak
Copy link
Member

hhorak commented Apr 23, 2018

https://google.github.io/styleguide/shell.xml#Function_Names suggests to use :: separator for libraries separation, so we can end up with something like:

ct::os::print_logs "some"

instead of

ct_os_print_logs "some"
@praiskup
Copy link
Contributor

It's not portable shell idiom, and so I don't like that (as a lot of things in that document).
OTOH, if we feel it is worth it... we don't care much about portability in this project, so
I have no strong opinion.

@hhorak
Copy link
Member Author

hhorak commented Apr 23, 2018

I wanted just to hear more opinions, not that I'd push on that either. Thanks for the feedback so far, I'd keep this open to see more feedback, but I agree that without a good reason to change it, it's not worth it.

@omron93
Copy link
Contributor

omron93 commented Apr 24, 2018

In my point of view, portability of this project isn't so important. But I'm also thinking if the readability of the new format is so better, that it makes sense to rewrite tests for several images...

@pkubatrh
Copy link
Member

Imo the readability improves by a bit but I do not think it is worth the change, considering we would need to change all of the images to the new format (or keep both for compatibility I guess)

@hhorak
Copy link
Member Author

hhorak commented Oct 4, 2018

I agree it's not worth it, closing.

@hhorak hhorak closed this as completed Oct 4, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants