Re: Problems with the new Var code

[Tim Van Holder]

> >>> "Tim" == Tim Van Holder <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>  >> I've preserved the semantic of the old
>  >> General::find_configure_ac in Configure_ac::search_configure_ac
> 
>  Tim> Why change the name of the sub like that - the new name is
>  Tim> definitely worse English.  
> 
> I'm always very bad at labelling things, even in French.  I'm
> fine with changing names to something else if one can suggest
> better names.
> 
>  Tim> find_configure_ac correctly described what it did
>  Tim> (i.e. locate configure.ac); search_configure_ac suggests
>  Tim> you're looking _through_ the file (find = chercher; search
>  Tim> = chercher _dans_).
> 
> <Blush> Does it?  To me, find = trouver, search = chercher.
> (I.e., you can search for something that doesn't exist, but
> you'll never find it -- that's the difference between the two
> functions.)

True - but think of the function names as _commands_, not as
activities (cfr. the 'find' command found on most Unices).  So
'find_x()' means you're ordering the system to find 'x'
('trouvez!' =~ 'chercher svp').  As such 'find' is a perfectly
acceptable prefix.

'search' DOES equate to 'chercher', but only with 'for'; compare
  'I'm searching for clues'
and
  'I'm searching the room'

> But again, let's rename these if they can be less
> confusing.  Maybe s/search/search_for/, or s/search/seek/?  Any
> other idea?

'find' or 'locate' are perfectly good prefixes (the latter works both
as a command and as an action, so is perhaps an even better source);
'search_for' is ok too, I guess.