[darcs-users] darcs patch: add "parallel pairs" (and 6 more)

[Peter B. West]

On 19/09/2009, at 5:18 AM, Nicolas Pouillard wrote:

> Excerpts from Eric Kow's message of Fri Sep 18 09:14:25 +0200 2009:
>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 22:52:30 +0100, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
>>> This is an initial attempt at adding interactive editing of hunk
>>> patches. I don't necessarily expect this sequence to be applied
>>> as-is, though it could be.
>>
>> What a treat!  I'm going to push the easy patches first
>>
>> * add "parallel pairs"
>> * break out and export run_editor utility function
>> * Add utility code for editing text
>>
>> And leave the meat of this bundle for later (perhaps somebody else
>> wants to tag themselves in?)
>
> I have a question about the hunk editing feature.
> Does it leave the pristine tree as is (like git), or not?
>
> [...]
>
>> break out and export run_editor utility function
>> ------------------------------------------------
>>> +run_editor :: FilePath -> IO ExitCode
>>> +run_editor f = do
>>> +  ed <- get_editor
>>> +  exec_interactive ed f
>>> +       `ortryrunning` exec_interactive "emacs" f
>>> +       `ortryrunning` exec_interactive "emacs -nw" f
>>> +       `ortryrunning` exec_interactive "nano" f
>>> +#ifdef WIN32
>>> +       `ortryrunning` exec_interactive "edit" f
>>> +#endif
>>
>> I think all new functions should be camelCase.  It's not that I care,
>> it's just that I want it to stop even being a question.  The desired
>> outcome is that we never get anybody having to scratch their heads
>> looking for a deeper meaning or conventions behind the case.
>
> I think (if my memory serve me well) that it is one of David's  
> convention;
> that is: camel case for exported values and underscores for internal  
> ones.
> Which would make sense since you are exporting a previously internal  
> thing,
> right?
>

I'm a mere user of darcs, waiting for the day when I can unreservedly  
recommend it for all SCM users, but...

CamelCase is one of my pet loathings. It dramatically impacts  
readability in long names, consequently discouraging their use. That  
much, I think, is unexceptionable.

If you would argue against long names, fair enough.

IMO, CamelCase has a general negative impact on readability. I have  
heard the argument that it draws the eye to the functions and  
variables, which I take to support my point.

Good morning to you,
Don Quixote