Re: [Csnd-dev] language cleanup...

>
> - there are a few cases where overloading cannot be done, for instance if
> parameters have same types but different functions. Overall I think it's
> good to overload as much as possible.
>

I was thinking as much. Let's see how many we are left with after a quick
audit, and then decide whether to rename them, or continue with the version
2 variants.


> - I would try to keep to the most common format so we need to
> create/deprecate fewer names
>

Flatcase is definitely the most common format. I don't love it, but it's a
nice wink to the past. The path of least resistance here is to move all
opcodes to flatcase, and let that by the convention for all new opcodes.

- if we introduce new names to S, b and B, we should do them as aliases not
> replacements.
>

Absolutely.


> One thing in particular I like to see deprecated is outs/outq/out8 etc as
> out can handle any number of channels. Same for in and ins etc.
>
We should also discuss the complete method to handle deprecation from the
> code sources to the manual.
>

Agreed.