[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Inconsistent function names and arguments

[Jeff Mallatt <jjm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 2000/07/22 14:42 , Raimar Falke wrote:
>Examples 1: There are two function in map.h
>map.h:int is_water_adjacent_to_tile(int x, int y);
>map.h:int is_water_adjacent(int x, int y);

Well, is_water_adjacent(x,y) just seems totally wrong, because it includes
the tile at (x,y).  If it did not include the tile at (x,y), it should be
named similarly to the is_*_near_tile() functions (i.e.,
is_water_near_tile()).

And, is_water_adjacent_to_tile(x,y) is really more like
is_irrigation_source_available(x,y).

>Example 2: There is a function
>government.h:int government_has_flag(const struct government *gov, 
>                                     enum government_flag_id flag);
>and there are functions
>tech.h:int tech_flag(int tech, int flag);
>unit.h:int unit_flag(Unit_Type_id id, int flag);
>
>Why not be consistent and call the last two tech_has_flag and unit_has_flag.
>The latter name should be changed another time to unit_type_has_flag.
>Nevertheless would it be useful to define a unit_has_flag since a lot of the
>usages of unit_flag today are "if (unit_flag(punit->type, F_SOME_FLAG))".
>Last point: the government function takes a pointer while the
>others takes ids. (And there is the another issue int-vs.-real type for the
>flag)

How about replacing the tech and unit functions with:

tech.h
------

/* same as current tech_flag() */
int tech_type_has_flag(Tech_Type_id tech_type, enum tech_flag_id flag);

unit.h
------

/* same as current unit_flag() */
int unit_type_has_flag(Unit_Type_id unit_type, enum unit_flag_id flag);

/* this takes a pointer to a unit, not to a unit type */
int unit_has_flag(struct unit *punit, enum unit_flag_id flag);

Many calls currently look like:
   unit_flag(punit->type, ...)
replace them with:
   unit_has_flag(punit, ...)

And, replace all the rest of the unit_flag() calls with unit_type_has_flag().

jjm