GNU bug report logs - #27397
[PATCH] New commands for bulk tracing of elisp functions

Previous Next

Full log

Message #19 received at 27397 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Phil Sainty <psainty <at> orcon.net.nz>
To: Kaushal Modi <kaushal.modi <at> gmail.com>, 27397 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
Subject: Re: bug#27397: [PATCH] New commands for bulk tracing of elisp
 functions
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 20:48:46 +1200

> On 6/16/17 4:32 PM, Phil Sainty wrote:
>> (I note that the `trace-is-traced' function does not follow the usual
>> naming convention for predicates.  Should this be renamed to
>> `trace-is-traced-p' ?)


On 17/06/17 02:58, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
> I'm not 100% sure about the protocol here, but including both "-is-"
> and "-p" in a function name seems too much.
>
> So maybe you should do the opposite and rename trace-is-traceable-p to
> trace-is-traceable.


On 17/06/17 03:43, Kaushal Modi wrote:
> Based on current examples[1], it is more common to see predicate
> *functions* end in "-p". So the "-is-" portion is maybe redundant.
>
> My suggestion would be something like "trace-traced-p" or
> "trace-fn-traced-p".
>
> [1]: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?att=0;bug=26564;msg=5


FWIW, after loading more or less all the lisp in trunk, apropos tells me:

2381 matches for ".*-p$"
126 matches for "-is-"
28 matches for "-is-.*-p$"


The -p suffix is certainly what I'm used to seeing, but -is- is entirely
readable to my mind, so I'm happy either way.  Consistency is good, so
some kind of change seemed sensible to me, but I don't especially mind
one way or the other.

If one of the maintainers wants to make a recommendation, I'll update
the code (or leave it as-is) accordingly.


-Phil

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.