[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software

Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

rename thread.rb

Martin DeMello

12/17/2006 8:10:00 PM

I think thread.rb should be renamed 'threadutils.rb', with a period
where both exist and the former is deprecated - since Thread itself is
in core, and thread.rb merely introduces supplementary classes,
threadutils seems like an apter name.

What do people think? I'll file an RCR if it sounds like a good idea.

martin

3 Answers

Christian Neukirchen

12/17/2006 9:08:00 PM

0

"Martin DeMello" <martindemello@gmail.com> writes:

> I think thread.rb should be renamed 'threadutils.rb', with a period
> where both exist and the former is deprecated - since Thread itself is
> in core, and thread.rb merely introduces supplementary classes,
> threadutils seems like an apter name.
>
> What do people think? I'll file an RCR if it sounds like a good idea.

What about time.rb?

> martin
--
Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> http://chneuk...

David Vallner

12/17/2006 9:12:00 PM

0

Martin DeMello wrote:
> I think thread.rb should be renamed 'threadutils.rb', with a period
> where both exist and the former is deprecated - since Thread itself is
> in core, and thread.rb merely introduces supplementary classes,
> threadutils seems like an apter name.
>
> What do people think? I'll file an RCR if it sounds like a good idea.
>

This has been discussed before. I think generally the conclusion was
that it would be potentially breaking code to solve something which
isn't tangibly a problem, but feel free to search the archives for
detail without my bias towards the above.

David Vallner


Robert Klemme

12/17/2006 9:29:00 PM

0

On 17.12.2006 22:11, David Vallner wrote:
> Martin DeMello wrote:
>> I think thread.rb should be renamed 'threadutils.rb', with a period
>> where both exist and the former is deprecated - since Thread itself is
>> in core, and thread.rb merely introduces supplementary classes,
>> threadutils seems like an apter name.
>>
>> What do people think? I'll file an RCR if it sounds like a good idea.
>
> This has been discussed before. I think generally the conclusion was
> that it would be potentially breaking code to solve something which
> isn't tangibly a problem, but feel free to search the archives for
> detail without my bias towards the above.

I second that. It's not worth the effort. The name is well established
and changing it will break *a lot* of code as well as create headaches
for package maintainers for all Linux distributions (and probably others
as well). It's a bad idea because the benefits are by far outweighed by
the disadvantages.

Regards

robert