On 2022/12/05 08:19:00 -0700, Tracey Emery <tracey@traceyemery.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 04, 2022 at 11:53:29PM +0100, Omar Polo wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> 
> Is there a reason you moved from the more descriptive function names to
> the less descriptive names? Yes, I understand they are shorter, but I
> moved to the gotweb_render_header from gw_head style so I couldn know
> what I was looking at with a glance, especially when jumping between a
> large set of open files.
> 
> With the former, I know i'm in the gotweb set of functions, that's it's
> meant to render html output, and what it's outputting. I think we need
> to be either consistently descriptive or not. Let's not mix the two.

admittedly i haven't gave it much thought.  I started to use a
different "namespace" because in my initial attempt i was trying to
replace each function, but wanted to keep the copy of the old
functions while hacking and hence the different naming.
Then, it remained when I started this second attempt.

I agree with the consistent and descriptive naming, so I'll change
them soon (~ two/three days, i'm a bit busy atm.)