Syntax, shall we?
mark.uzumati at virgin.net
Thu Feb 7 00:17:02 PST 2002
On 2002.02.06 14:45 flake at sedum.tommyk.com wrote:
> On 2002-02-05, Seth W. Klein doth wrote:
> > > > But, thinking about it, i take back the <createfile> suggestion.
> I think
> > > > something consistent with <mkdir> would be better. The obvious
> is <mkfile>
> > > > but that is more abbreviation than usually popular these days.
> How about
> > > > <makefile> and <makedir>?
> > >
> > > Well in that case (in regard to consistency), I would use
> <create_dir> and
> > > <create_file> instead. ;) <makefile> might be misleading,
> especially since
> > > we have <make> element.
> > Oophf, never thought of that. Yep, create wins. But i _still_ don't
> > the underscore is a good idea.
> > > It would nice if more people throw their comments in. I think that
> > > changes like these need more opinions.
> > I second that.
> K, how about <createFile> and <createDir>? AFAIK, xml is case
> sensitive, so have to watch out for those type of typos when making
> profiles. Easy for me, that style of nameing has become my style of
> choice for variable names and things of that nature :)
My personal preference would be the underscore style, never liked the
Java style particularly, but i'll probably survive with either :)
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message
More information about the alfs-discuss