Re: Rename src/

[Daniel J Sebald]

On 08/14/2012 12:46 PM, Robert T. Short wrote:
> On 08/14/2012 10:43 AM, Michael D Godfrey wrote:
> > On 08/14/2012 12:39 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> > > One last thing in the source tree reorganisation. Can we rename src/ to interp/?
> > >
> > > - Jordi G. H.
> > I vote yes.:-)
> So if we are going to make descriptive names, why not really get
> descriptive - interpreter instead of interp, libfortran instead of
> libfort, etc.?  Long names inflict minor inconvenience I suppose, but
> shortened names seems so, well, FORTRAN and 1960.

An emphatic "no" on that idea.  I go with historic precedent.  The 
reason these condensed names came about is that it cuts down on 
keystrokes and length of names.  The latter was important in 1960 when 
memory and screen size was limited, but the former point on keystrokes 
still holds.  I realize there is tab-completion for a lot of things 
these days, but still there is benefit to adhering to convention.  "src" 
is a common condensation in the linux tree.  "usr", "src", "etc" are 
ingrained symbols that make a programmer efficient, just like memorized 
control sequences for a favorite editor.  It doesn't mean much to 
someone who's not a programmer at heart and just pecks around on the 
keyboard, but for folks who do programming 24+/7+ it makes a difference. 
 (I'm not one them, but hold that view out of deference.)

Along that same lines, I would avoid spaces in directories for sure. 
Also avoid directory names that have several letters in common at the 
front, such as "interp-core" and "interpfcn".  Having such things makes 
tab completion or searching clumsy at times.  If the "interp" must be a 
commonality, my feeling is to then make a directory "interp" with 
subdirectories "core" and "fcn".  Most of all, be consistent.  For 
example, "corefcn", "interp-core", "interpfcn" has some inconsistencies 
in the sense that

1) Some directories have hyphenation, some don't.
2) The "fcn" is almost a redundancy, unless the implication is that 
there is some function in Octave called "core" and some function inside 
Octave called "interp".  Otherwise, if it just means inside the 
directory are some functions related to "core", for example, then what 
else would the programmer think is in there if it were just "src/core"?
3) There's "corefcn", there's "interpfcn", and then there's a 
combination of the two "interp-core".  Perhaps that's correct, but on 
first read it makes one pause.

Dan