[Lemon-devel] Renaming basic classes

[Kovács Péter]

Hi,

> Im my previous mail I (re)suggested using of girl/boy or red/blue
> instead of anode/bnode. What is your opinion on this?

These versions are strange for me, but I think red/blue is better than
boy/girl. Boy/girl represents a very specific and explicit distinction. 
However red/blue or anode/bnode are neutral and they are used very often in
math, so it is less annoying to use them for abstract purposes (i.e. to
associate them with different kind of objects).

I think a() and b() is not a good choice. I suggest using longer, specific names.

Peter


On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 18:53:08 +0100, Alpár Jüttner wrote
> > > On the other hand I find the use of anode() and bnode() for
> > > this purpose very misleading.
> > In my point of view the source() and target() are more misleading than the 
> > anode() and bnode().
> 
> Well, it is a matter of taste. In fact, it would be the best if we could
> get rid of 'anode' and 'bnode'. This is another thing why I don't 
> like using these names for even more thing.
> 
> Im my previous mail I (re)suggested using of girl/boy or red/blue
> instead of anode/bnode. What is your opinion on this? It would be still
> strange for an egde of a non-bipartite graph, so then we should 
> either keep source/target or use first/second.
> 
> Another choice could be using just a and b (i.e. a() and b() would be
> the function names, while the related classes would be A and B).  Or 
> is it too radical? (For me, it isn't.) Would do you think?
> 
> Alpar