[cairo] API Shapeup, setters and getters consistency, get vs current

[Øyvind Kolås]

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:38:03 -0500, Keith Packard <keithp at keithp.com> wrote:
> 
> Around 17 o'clock on Feb 15, Carl Worth wrote:
> 
> > And besides, even if I'm not a fan of abbreviation, I do like shorter
> > names when they are equally clear. So I propose "get" everywhere
> > instead of "current".
> 
> Does that eliminate the distinction between accessors for values which are
> in the gstate and values which are not?  I like that particular
> distinction as it re-enforces what the gstate consists of right in the API
> itself.

If it doesn't i think we should be suspicious about other values
stored in the cairo context, or perhaps split out a separate gstate
object that is being acted upon, that would make the structure of the
API reflect it instead of a naming convention, which makes little
sense for some programming languages.

/Øyvind K.
-- 
Software patents hinder progress | http://swpat.ffii.org/ 
Web :  http://pippin.gimp.org/