On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 18:01:57 +0200 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Honestly, I don't care much. Yes, it would be nicer if they were all named using a unique scheme. But this causes renaming, changing files where the file names are used, may result in odd left-overs or other potential problems which aren't really necessary (ok, probably it's not that much work, but it is also not really a big problem at all). If you feel really uncomfortable with that, feel free to change it. If not, I don't care.
OK, I'll leave it. Do you have any preference for any new files I might add in future: newfile.h new-file.h new_file.h? I guess the rule could be to use the first one unless the name is confusing, like uiutils would be - in those cases, use underscores. Probably I'll rename the plugin-symbols.c file as this seems to be the exception, as tm_source_file.h uses underscores.
...
I'd thought maybe we could rename document.[hc] documents.[hc] - or would you prefer not to? I'm not sure but it might be more consistent with filetypes.c, using the plural rather than singular.
I remember I chose the singular 'document' (long time ago :D) based on the content this file should have: the document struct to represent an open document in Geany and related functions which work on one document 'object'. This were never really consistent done but mostly. And except for a few functions like document_close_all or document_open_files, this still applies, IMO. So, I would rather keep it as it is.
OK, no problem.
Regards, Nick