[Bf-committers] Re: [Bf-blender-cvs] CVS commit: blender/source/blender/python/api2_2x Object.c blender/source/blender/python/api2_2x/doc IDProp.py Texture.py Scene.py Object.py Image.py Mesh.py NMesh.py Material.py

[Willian Padovani Germano]

Hi Joe (thanks for the properties work :) ) and all,

Joe Eagar wrote:
> Campbell Barton wrote:
>> Trivial, but could .properties be called  .props ? -  .properties is a 
>> bit of a mouthfull, some other shorter term would suffice
(...)
> Ken, Willian, what do you think?

And others, too :). This is something we should decide for the whole API 
(short "vs." actual/readable names). Our current guideline is to follow 
Blender's UI, but atually we have a mix of old / new / not reviewed names.

As Martin said, it's important to have precise, readable terms and 
follow the Blender UI names. But it's also true that whenever possible 
it's good to be less verbose. So in general: what is the best guideline?

1) Use precise / readable names, following the UI.

2) Use shorter names.

3) (1+2 for special cases) Having the precise name as default and a 
shorter version for faster access (*). We'd document the precise one (so 
favoring its usage) and mention in its doc the shorter alternative.

(*) We can (should) restrict this to the more common things, like 
location (loc), rotation (rot), color (col), material(s) (mat(s)), 
property(ies) (prop(s)), etc.

My vote: I like #3: have readable names, but where needed also a shorter 
alternative (that should be a good reminder of what it actually means).

-- 
Willian