Re: Code cleanup -- inconsistent "width" and "height" etc.

[Kim F. Storm]

Kenichi Handa <address@hidden> writes:

> In article <address@hidden>, address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:
> > Alternatively, we could use *_COLS in general as a short precise name
> > when the width is measured in columns (the canonical X unit).
> > Similarly, we could use *_LINES for heights measured in lines (the
> > canonical Y unit).
> 
> > If we do that consistently, we could simply use *_WIDTH and *_HEIGHT to
> > mean pixel width and height.
> 
> But, as I wrote, Lisp APIs are already using
> ...-width/...-height for columns and lines.  Even if we
> implement pixel-base APIs in the future, we can't change the
> current ones, then we'll use ...-pixel-width...-pixel-height
> for the new APIs.  In that case, having a different
> convention in C code is not good.

So there is no hope of cleaning up the current mess ?

How can we ever make progress towards removing the column/lines
limitation on frame and window dimensions if we cannot find
a way to clean up the current naming mess?

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk