Re: outlet v. context

[David Kastrup]

Dan Eble <dan@faithful.be> writes:

>     virtual Context *get_outlet () const;
>     virtual void set_context (Context *);
>     . . .
>     void init_context (Music *, Context *);
>     . . .
>     void substitute_outlet (Context *from, Context *to);
>
> This is driving me nuts.  Is anyone attached to the term "outlet"?  If
> so, please suggest how I might modify my thinking to avoid typing
> "get_context" when I should have typed "get_outlet".

While you are at it: I don't see that there is lots of sense in having
get_context () for some classes and context () for others.  Or
get_parent_context () for some and get_daddy_context () for others.
Generally the get_ prefix seems a bit spurious: given that we use the
naming convention field_ for data members, calling the read accessor
field () seems like it should always be workable.

-- 
David Kastrup