Re: GNUstep Coding Standard Additions

[Sheldon Gill]

> > Are there other coding standard issues which should be addressed?
>
> Any and all classes, enumerated types, & constants which are GNUstep specific,
> should be renamed to start with the GS prefix.  Currently there are only a few
> examples of things which violate this (i.e. they begin with NS instead of GS),
> but I would like it to be consistent across the board.  The NS prefix should be
> reserved for Apple/OpenStep classes ONLY.  This gives a clear indication to
> developers what is and is not available on both platforms.  Also all methods in
> existing NS classes which are GNUstep extensions of said class should be
> clearly documented as such in the gsdoc comments.

You've raised an important issue here which I was intending to raise 
separately.

Firstly, I wholeheartedly agree about GS and believe pretty much 
everyone shares that opinion or can live with it.

Greg, would you be willing to get the ball rolling by providing a list 
of NS->GS changes that you know of?

Secondly, I'd like the docs to clearly state the source for 
functions/methods as OpenStep, MacOS (differentiate puma, jaguar, 
panther and tiger) or GS (version).

That said, doing so for everything is a big undertaking. To achieve this 
someone will have to research the calls. I'd be happy to baseline now so 
that calls are OpenStep, MacOS (panther) or GS current. We can then 
maintain from there.

Perhaps a new-comer would like to put up their hand to generate a 
reference table marking all calls as one of the three?  Strikes me as a 
good way to review the API and get familiar with the documentation. 
Could be a good assignment for students, too. Anyone teach class?

Thirdly, I advocate moving GNUstep additions to Additions as far as 
possible.


Regards,
Sheldon