The Oxford Dictionary lists "millisecond" as a single word, so it would just be consistent to name our selectors #milliseconds. At some places, we already write it in one word, i.e. in Time class, Monitor, Sound. Duration appears to be the only protocol with #milliSeconds. If it's not too complicated, personally, I would vote for renaming it into #milliseconds. If no one else feels like doing so, I could prepare a changeset. :-)


Best,

Christoph

________________________________
Von: Squeak-dev <squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org> im Auftrag von David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. März 2021 22:21:28
An: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
Betreff: Re: [squeak-dev] The Inbox: Chronology-Core-dtl.66.mcz

On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:10:22PM +0200, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Sun, 28 Mar 2021, David T. Lewis wrote:
>
> >On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 11:13:37AM -0500, Jaromir Matas wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>great!
> >>
> >>Would it be a bad idea to have milliseconds instead (or on top) of
> >>milliSeconds? Etc.
> >>
> >
> >I would not want to bother with that. It would just add more stuff
> >to the API, and the existing selector names are good enough.
>
> I find the existing names annoying. I think the author of those
> methods was not familiar with the SI system.
>

I have no strong opinion one way or the other. It's a bit of aggrivation
to manage the deprecation process, but aside from that I guess there
is no reason not to fix the selector names. Should we do that?

Dave


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20210407/03024e0f/attachment.html>