RE: [Wxruby-dev] Group vote on naming questions

[repeater]

Curt Hibbs wrote:
>
>
> Kevin Smith wrote:
> >
> > I would like a "group vote" on some naming issues. Ideally the core
> > people would respond this weekend, so I can completely finish the naming
> > transformation this weekend. Here are the questions:
> >
> > ----
> > 1. Currently, the library is named 'wxruby', but the module is named
> > 'Wx'. This means you might say:
> >
> > require 'wxruby'
> > include 'Wx'
> >
> > I think 'wxruby' is perfect.
>
> I agree.
>
> > I think the module name should remain 'Wx', because it should start with
> > an upper case letter, and should be mixed-case. I guess 'WxRuby' would
> > be an option, but it seems too long if you choose not to use include and
> > have to use WxRuby::... everywhere.
> >
> > Please vote for 'Wx', 'WxRuby', or something else.
>
> I like "Wx".
>
> > 2. Currently, classes are named like WxWindow, so you would either refer
> > to them as:
> >
> > include 'Wx'
> > WxWindow.new(...)
> >
> > or just
> >
> > Wx::WxWindow.new(...)
> >
> > This seems redundant to me, so I would like to rename them to just
> > Window instead of WxWindow. Ok?
>
> I agree here, too -- go with "Wx::Window".

I second the things Curt have said, but regarding the above:

-One must just make sure that with WxSomething there is no Something that
conflicts with Ruby (and that is something that may bite you as the
wxWindows team add something later, like wxInteger)
-Mostly i would say 'include Wx', and i suspect so would normal users.
'Window' may thus become an idiom - subsequently when the WxWindows
documentation is used, it might just add a slight level of confusion. The
wxWindows documentation will remain the primary reference for quite some
while i believe, so it may not be a good idea to stray too much.

So i think you should try to keep the class names the same.

Kevin, have you considered how to make the interface more Rubyesque, or do
you think that is something better left for a later revision?

regards
Peter