Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: December 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#11338) [Patch] can_transport()
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#11338) [Patch] can_transport()

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: marko.lindqvist@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#11338) [Patch] can_transport()
From: "email_address=jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxx" <email_address=jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 16:10:24 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=11338 >


>   Function names are probably not final. What naming convention should
> be used here?

It should mention "unit" somewhere.  Maybe can_unit_transport() or
can_unit_transport_unit() or unit_can_transport_unit().  And the same for
unittype.

AFAIK there's no convention on whether to use can_unit or unit_can as a
prefix.  For unittypes I think the prefix is unit_type.

-jason







[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]