Re: naming scheme for the GSL package

[ederag]

On Thursday, October 13, 2016 22:55:00 Julien Bect wrote:
> ...
> In fact, the "gsl_sf_" prefix is removed.  For instance : 
> "gsl_sf_clausen" is made available as "clausen".
> 
> I see two difficulties with this naming scheme :
> 
> a) Name conflicts.  Some GSL functions names would coincide with Octave 
> function names.  This problem has been solved in earlier release of the 
> GSL package by adding a "_gsl" suffix, but this makes the naming scheme 
> inconsistent.
> 
> b) Short names.  Some function names become very short and look like 
> variable names.  For instance, "gsl_sf_eta" becomes "eta", "gsl_sf_Si" 
> becomes "Si"...  I am not comfortable with such short names.
> 
> I propose to keep full GSL names to solve both problems.
> 
> Any opinions ?
> 
> @++
> Julien


Agreed, full GSL names would be much better.

Best regards,
ederag