[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#13460) consistent names for index-to-pointer lookups

["Marko Lindqvist" <marko.lindqvist@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=13460 >

Jason Short wrote:
> 
>   struct unit_class *get_unit_class(Unit_type_id type);
> 
> Note that get_unit_class is put at the end.  This isn't actually an
> index-to-pointer lookup function but it has the exact same name form as
> most of the existing index-to-pointer lookups!  This is very bad
> (solution is to rename it and change its parameter to a struct unit_type
> *, or just to remove it).

  unit_type_get_class()? Why pointer? Most (future) users will need 
class for certain unit, not unit_type: unit_type_get_class(punit->type) 
vs unit_type_get_class(index_to_unit_type(punit->type))

  Which leads to another function name scheme question. If function to 
get class for single unit is ever introduced, should it be named 
unit_get_class()? That seems too easy to confuse with 
unit_type_get_class(). Maybe unit_instance_get_class()?


  - ML