Re: [Csnd-dev] language cleanup...
Rory Walsh <[email protected]> Sat, 1 Nov 2025 20:59:17 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.audio.csound.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAMJR=HNaGj9tUaqcWocYur2bSbkqw6kNSrX4nrxCc85uC5auMQ@mail.gmail.com> |
No, absolutely not. These would be aliases. The old opcode names would still exist. On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 at 23:17, Pete Goodeve <[email protected]> wrote: > Doesn't that completely break the core principle of backwards > compatibility? Not something that I would consider. > > -- Pete -- > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 10:53:47PM +0000, Rory Walsh wrote: > > We also have shedkwhen and ftsamplebank, which are also ok, I think. I > > think if we introduce snake case, or any other convention, we need to go > > all in. Snake case should add an underscore between each word. Following > > such a scheme would lead to hundreds of opcodes being renamed, e.g., > > ft_len, butter_lp, moog_ladder, pd_half, etc. I'm not against it, but I > > think it must be a complete buy in. Otherwise we end up with a slightly > > better system, but one that retains some strange inconsistencies. > > > > I have to tip my hat to the core developers at this stage. This > > conversation wouldn't be happening if they hadn't spent so much time > > cleaning up the core system and updating/rewriting the parser. It's a > great > > place we are in now! ☺️ > > > > On Fri 31 Oct 2025, 17:17 joachim heintz, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > i totally agree with rory about the importance of such a cleanup. > > > as to lowercase or snake_case, i'd say: > > > - in most cases we can keep lowercase > > > - if the readability is hurted, underscores can be added. > > > > > > for instance: ampdb, mtof, bformenc, butbp, pvsynth are good. > > > osclisten even is ok, i think. > > > > > > just to note that for the german keyboard the underscore is not as > > > elegant as for the english one. > > > > > > On 31/10/2025 16:46, Steven Yi wrote: > > > > I generally prefer snake_case myself these days for Csound coding. > > > > Perhaps it's because my brain switches somewhat to C conventions when > > > > I get to time with Csound. Some of the coding in Csound for > snake_case > > > > has to do with the lack of namespaces and import system, so families > > > > of code are denoted with things like zdf_ladder, zdf_2pole, etc. > which > > > > might be implemented as zdf::ladder or zdf::2pole in other languages. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 9:36 AM Rory Walsh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I agree that they are more readable, but I think switching to > > > lowerCamelCase or snake_case would be a huge undertaking. I'm > interested to > > > hear what others think. > > > >> > > > >> On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 at 11:30, Dave Seidel <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> As a user, more consistency in naming would be very nice. I don't > have > > > a strong preference for any particular form, having had to adapt to > all of > > > them at one time or another over the course of my erstwhile career, > but I > > > guess I have somewhat of a reference for either lowerCamelCase or > > > snake_case, as both offer better readability (IMO) than flatcase. > > > >>> > > > >>> - Dave > > > >>> > > > >>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 5:47 AM Rory Walsh <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> It would be nice to iron out some inconsistencies in the language > > > before releasing Csound 7. One of these is the scattershot approach to > > > opcode names. Right now we have lowerCamelCase, snake_case, snake+camel > > > case, and the traditional flatcase. It would be nice to choose one, > create > > > aliases for all existing opcodes (if this is doable that is), and mark > the > > > others as deprecated. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Another thing that came up yesterday in a different discussion is > the > > > number of version 2 opcodes, diskin2, flooper2, etc. We can now easily > > > overload opcodes, which gives us the option of removing the version 2 > > > variants and overloading the originals instead, although we’d need to > audit > > > the opcodes first to see if they all have different parameter > signatures. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Something else that was mentioned was the use of uppercase for > > > booleans. bi, bk, booli, boolk, etc., all seem like better fits. > Another > > > long-standing inconsistency is the uppercase S for strings. If I’m not > > > mistaken, we could finally change this to :s and keep it in line with > other > > > variable types. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Consistency has a real impact on usability and teaching, making > code > > > easier to read and maintain. I think it would be great to try to > address > > > this now. I don't mind doing most of the donkey work. We just need to > come > > > to some kind of agreement. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Rory. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> p.s. I'm posting this to the dev-list, but I think this is > something > > > the end-users might also like to have some input on... > > > >