{"thread":{"id":"26007","subject":"file names","startedAt":"2010-12-09T17:05:33Z","lastAt":"2010-12-09T18:00:19Z","messageCount":3,"participants":["Thiago Farina","Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"157701","messageId":"AANLkTikeAFj68Rr35gcf4dxXXHU+au9wA7wd+-WB3BSS@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"26007","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"file names","fromName":"Thiago Farina","fromEmail":"tfransosi@gmail.com","sentAt":"2010-12-09T17:05:33Z","receivedAt":"2010-12-09T17:05:33Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"tfransosi@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/970071?v=4"},"body":"Hi, I was was looking into the file names and noticed that they are\nnot consistent.\n\nSome files are named like:\n\nfoo-bar.[c/h]\n\nOthers are:\n\nfoo_bar.[c/h]\n\nOn top of the git directory:\n\n# With dash\n$ lc *.c | grep - | wc -l\n72\n\n$ lc *.h | grep - | wc -l\n25\n\n# With underline\n$ ls *.c | grep _ | wc -l\n5\n\n$ ls *.h | grep _ | wc -l\n1\n\nSo it seems from this data, there is a preference for naming files\nusing dash over underline.\n\nSo the question is, should the files using underline be converted to\nuse dash instead? And should this be documented somewhere? Maybe in\nCodingGuidelines?\n\nThanks in advance.\n"},{"id":"157704","messageId":"7v39q6hm14.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org","threadId":"26007","inReplyTo":"AANLkTikeAFj68Rr35gcf4dxXXHU+au9wA7wd+-WB3BSS@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: file names","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2010-12-09T17:51:51Z","receivedAt":"2010-12-09T17:51:51Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Thiago Farina <tfransosi@gmail.com> writes:\n\n> So it seems from this data, there is a preference for naming files\n> using dash over underline.\n\nYes.\n\n> So the question is, should the files using underline be converted to\n> use dash instead?\n\nIf this were before v1.0.0, it might have made some sense, but not at this\nmoment.  So the answer to \"should?\" (or \"could?\") is a firm \"no\", which is\nalways different from the answer to \"wouldn't it have been nicer if they\nwere named differently?\"\n\nOr just after a large version bump (say 1.8.0), perhaps.\n"},{"id":"157706","messageId":"AANLkTin=H5HMKhXAyPwZu+jJinRxAhiirhWSSUCWNhWY@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"26007","inReplyTo":"7v39q6hm14.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org","subject":"Re: file names","fromName":"Thiago Farina","fromEmail":"tfransosi@gmail.com","sentAt":"2010-12-09T18:00:19Z","receivedAt":"2010-12-09T18:00:19Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"tfransosi@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/970071?v=4"},"body":"On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:\n> Thiago Farina <tfransosi@gmail.com> writes:\n>\n>> So it seems from this data, there is a preference for naming files\n>> using dash over underline.\n>\n> Yes.\n>\n>> So the question is, should the files using underline be converted to\n>> use dash instead?\n>\n> If this were before v1.0.0, it might have made some sense, but not at this\n> moment.  So the answer to \"should?\" (or \"could?\") is a firm \"no\", which is\n> always different from the answer to \"wouldn't it have been nicer if they\n> were named differently?\"\n>\nRight.\n\nWhat about documenting it? Is it worth, but only on version 1.8.0?\n"}]}