[Gretl-devel] Re: off-by-one bug in $system.t1 (and .t2) after var
Am 24.11.2020 um 19:52 schrieb Artur Tarassow:
Am 24.11.20 um 19:46 schrieb Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti:
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2020, Sven Schreiber wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to understand further the naming convention (or historical
>> path dependence). It seems the gretl_ prefix is quite common in
>> libgretl, and that actually the various functions starting with
>> "equation_system_" are the exception.
>>
>> My suggestion for harmonization is therefore to add the prefix gretl_
>> also to the systems-related functions. Perhaps
"gretl_equation_system_"
>> is a bit too long, and actually the "equation" part feels a bit
>> redundant IMHO. So what about this replacement rule for libgretl:
>>
>> *equation_system_* -> *gretl_system_*
>>
>> OK to apply?
>
> Of course I see your point and I'm all for anything that improves
> code consistency and legibility, but there's this nagging voice I
> keep hearing in may head that says "if it ain't broke..."
I completely understand the concern, that's why I'm bringing it up
directly after release. Actually it turns out the replacement rule was
not entirely correct, "equation_system" would also be covered.
Remember the ntolabel -> obstolabel renaming operation went just fine.
But of course care is needed. For example some C expert would have to
explain to me lines such as this one in lib/src/libgretl.h:
typedef struct equation_system_ equation_system;
It still looks to me as if replacement with "typedef struct
gretl_system_ gretl_system;" should be OK.
The underlying question is really whether there is a reason the gretl_
prefix should *not* be used in this case / for these objects.
@Sven: Create a new branch, make changes, compile the code and run
some/ our test suites ;-)
@Jack: This is _exactly_ for what tests are: To verify that things
still work as expected after changes. And that's why I frequently
plead for much more tests ;-)
Yeah, a branch was the idea, perhaps my formulation "ok to apply" was a
bit misleading. I would guess we already have some test scripts in the
systems area, but not sure about that.
cheers
sven