Re: on package naming, should the word "_pkg" be part of it?

[Ian Wild <ian@cfmu.eurocontrol.int>]

John McCabe wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2001 09:07:17 GMT, Ian Wild <ian@cfmu.eurocontrol.int>
> wrote:
> 
> >I've not seen it mentioned yet, but you really need to add
> >at least *three* new incantations:
> >
> > -o- To attract Java programmers you need "object.method()", and
> >make it dispatching.
> >
> >  -o- To attract C++ programmers you need a non-dispatching
> >"object.method()", and a dispatching "access_to_object->method()".
> 
> I disagree with the last one. Consider the Ada justification for not
> differentiating the dot notation between 'pointers' and objects, and I
> think this should be applied to any future change of method calling.

But you need the two different versions to allow (and, indeed, force)
the programmer to endlessly fret about the relative efficiency of
a direct non-dispatching call versus a vtable lookup.

> Personally, now I'm using C++, I find the -> a pain!

Me too, and me too.  I'd be happier if C++ had, in its early days, adopted
the then-common convention of putting the verb first, followed by a
parethesised list of actual parameters.  No wonder it never caught on.