26 Jul
2006
26 Jul
'06
9:21 a.m.
On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 11:26 +0100, Chris Cannam wrote:
I think if your class is named LikeThis, then your method should be named
likeThat (Java-style). If your method is named like_this, then your class
should be named like_that (STL-style). Either is fine, but don't mix your
dialects.
I use ClassNames and function_names all the time. I think it makes it
easier to distinguish between them.
Mmm. For what it's worth, I write mostly C++ but have no problem with using
the libsndfile C API. I don't really mind whether it has a C++ API as well
or not. So yes, you probably should ignore me.
I agree - the libsndfile API is simple enough to fit into C++ code quite
nicely.
--
Lars Luthman - please encrypt any email sent to me if possible
PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x04C77E2E
Fingerprint: FCA7 C790 19B9 322D EB7A E1B3 4371 4650 04C7 7E2E
On Wednesday 26 Jul 2006 11:12, Florian Paul Schmidt
wrote:
Operator overloading is lovely. When reading fixed size audio chunks a
function call syntax makes more sense though (how else would you specify
the chunk size? sndfile>>setw(1024)>>my_buffer is a bit too weird).
Well, it is very thin though. Which is not a bad
thing at all. One could
make ue of an arbitrary amount of more advanced C++ features if desired
though (i.e. templates parametrized with the type you want to read for
example, or operator<< and operator>> for reading and writing, etc.)
operator<< and >>... ugh. Secondly, with regard to the method names, which do
you prefer:
- OpenRead
- openRead
- open_read
vote++, i never cared for the more java style methodName convention. Since you're the only person who actually
responded to the real
meat of my email, I have to assume that you are the only person
on this list with a love for C++ and hence the only one who
should have any real input on this issue ;-).
Nicely worded :)