flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Main > Naming functions in the FASM Standard Library


How should functions in the standard library be named?
INCLUDEALLGLOBALS
4%
 4%  [ 1 ]
includeallglobals
4%
 4%  [ 1 ]
IncludeAllGlobals
33%
 33%  [ 8 ]
Include_All_Globals
4%
 4%  [ 1 ]
include_all_globals
37%
 37%  [ 9 ]
includeAllGlobals
16%
 16%  [ 4 ]
Total Votes : 24

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
crc



Joined: 21 Jun 2003
Posts: 637
Location: Penndel, PA [USA]
crc 11 Jun 2005, 16:52
What form should function names use in the FASM Standard Library?

_________________
Charles Childers, Programmer
Post 11 Jun 2005, 16:52
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid 11 Jun 2005, 18:13
seems you messed it a little bit. "IncludeAllGlobals" was example for names of macros, not funcs.
Did you mean macros or functions? If you meant functions don't forget about prefix with name of routinepack.
I think poll needs to be reseted, people probably didn't know what they are voting about.
Post 11 Jun 2005, 18:13
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
crc



Joined: 21 Jun 2003
Posts: 637
Location: Penndel, PA [USA]
crc 11 Jun 2005, 18:20
I wasn't aware that the naming rules would be significantly different. I assume that there will be a prefix for routine packs, so you might have math.squareRoot or math.square_root or whatever. But the naming rules for both macros and functions should be the same IMO.
Post 11 Jun 2005, 18:20
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
pelaillo
Missing in inaction


Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia
pelaillo 11 Jun 2005, 18:29
I remember the same sort of poll the last time we talk about standard lib here Smile
Post 11 Jun 2005, 18:29
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid 11 Jun 2005, 22:31
i think procs should have different naming than macros. I personally prefer includeAllGlobals, because it's less typing, in include_all_globals, you have to push shift for each word (except first) anyway, and you also have to move hand to "-" key which is quite out-of-standard-position.

Anyway, i think this poll was made too soon, we haven't agreed even on starting the project yet, first we have to find people willing to code library.

pelaillo: well, it is a serious question (asked too son i think but anyway)
Post 11 Jun 2005, 22:31
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
Kain



Joined: 26 Oct 2003
Posts: 108
Kain 12 Jun 2005, 03:03
I don't think this is the proper forum to be discussing the particulars of a FASM standard library, unless the goal is for it to be compiled into a library for linking with HLLs.

Perhaps further discussion should be moved to the "Main" forum.
Post 12 Jun 2005, 03:03
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
decard



Joined: 11 Sep 2003
Posts: 1092
Location: Poland
decard 12 Jun 2005, 09:30
You're right, this topic should be moved to Main forum.
vid: why do you think that it is too soon for this poll? More people will be able to vote it this topic stays for longer.
Post 12 Jun 2005, 09:30
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid 12 Jun 2005, 17:45
decard: there wasn't enough information told about it and i think many people vote withoout deeper knowledge of problem (eg. differencing names for macros and procs and variables, discussion about each possibility etc.)
Post 12 Jun 2005, 17:45
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
coconut



Joined: 02 Apr 2004
Posts: 326
Location: US
coconut 12 Jun 2005, 17:59
i vote everything be lowercase except constants, this is assembly not C
Post 12 Jun 2005, 17:59
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid 13 Jun 2005, 07:25
cocount: then you have to tap shift anyway for "_" and you also have to move your hand to "-" key. But anyway, it's everyone's chose.
Post 13 Jun 2005, 07:25
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
coconut



Joined: 02 Apr 2004
Posts: 326
Location: US
coconut 13 Jun 2005, 12:40
its not so much for typing quick as for readability, im just used to asm in lowercase. but whatever standard is chosen will be fine
Post 13 Jun 2005, 12:40
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Madis731



Joined: 25 Sep 2003
Posts: 2139
Location: Estonia
Madis731 13 Jun 2005, 13:00
I wouldn't worry about comfy typing or readability, but the most important fact is that stuff like:
Code:
my_includes
test_code_base
    

would be too errorprone because you would have to raise your hand before typing the next word. I think you have had the same problem as many of us like writing first word of the sentence:

...end. HOping to reach...
here I wasn't just quick enough so writing:
include_all_Globals
can lead to hard-to-find bugs. Did you notice the mistake?
Post 13 Jun 2005, 13:00
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
coconut



Joined: 02 Apr 2004
Posts: 326
Location: US
coconut 13 Jun 2005, 16:07
what difference is it to have to shift anyways to capitilize letters? or type 0 or O characters right next to the - character
Post 13 Jun 2005, 16:07
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid 13 Jun 2005, 19:10
okay, let's leave "some_thing" then, i think votes are clear in this. Do you want me to keep track what we have agreed on for now?
Post 13 Jun 2005, 19:10
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2024, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on GitHub, YouTube.

Website powered by rwasa.