gistfile1.weechatlog

[00:37:10] <an-> naderman: class loader can't load from directories having underscores
[00:37:24] <an-> bit of a problem for extensions
[00:37:28] --> rxu (~Miranda@phpbb/developer/rxu) has joined #phpBB-dev
[00:37:41] *** Mode #phpBB-dev +o rxu by ChanServ
[00:38:12] <naderman> an-: yes
[00:38:15] <naderman> I pointed that out before
[00:38:24] <an-> was that intended?
[00:38:25] <naderman> the thing is, what are we going to use for a separator instead?
[00:38:26] <naderman> yes
[00:38:32] <naderman> we want a direct mapping class name => dir
[00:38:44] <naderman> if we allow underscores, it's very dependent on dir structure to load the class
[00:38:49] <an-> well you can look at each _ and see if it works
[00:38:52] <naderman> what do you do if there is both foo/bar and foo_bar?
[00:39:17] <naderman> basically the idea was to have a clear classname => path mapping
[00:39:26] <naderman> that doesn't require looking at the file structure
[00:39:34] <naderman> hence it doesn't do _ in directory names
[00:39:35] <an-> so you're suggesting indexpagetitle as an extension name then
[00:39:37] <an-> or not
[00:39:42] <naderman> if we had two separators it would get easier
[00:39:58] <naderman> well I was really hoping we'd come up with something clever instead
[00:40:08] <naderman> or we end up with camel cased extension names
[00:40:12] <an-> let's use \
[00:40:13] <naderman> which none of us really want either
[00:40:17] <naderman> so really I don't know
[00:40:22] <naderman> well now that we use PHP 5.3
[00:40:28] <naderman> we could just change it all to use namespaces
[00:40:30] <an-> ah snap
[00:40:30] <naderman> for the new classes
[00:40:33] <naderman> then we can do
[00:40:34] <naderman> \
[00:40:39] <naderman> and allow _ in the dir/class name
[00:40:53] <an-> my pointless remark happens to be the best and valid solution
[00:41:00] <imkingdavid> an- have you had a chance to look at the tests https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/561 ? I don't see what I'm doing wrong
[00:41:05] <imkingdavid> or naderman or anyone really can loo
[00:41:07] <imkingdavid> look*
[00:41:07] <an-> not yet sorry
[00:41:12] <imkingdavid> okay no problem
[00:41:36] <an-> any problem with namespaces?
[00:41:44] <an-> other than me having to type the stupid backslash all the time
[00:42:07] <naderman> an-: just that we need to change it all
[00:42:11] <an-> and will it work with our autoloader
[00:42:18] <naderman> but since it's all phpBB 3.1 anyway that's ok
[00:42:20] <naderman> no release yet
[00:42:30] <an-> all?
[00:42:32] <naderman> an-: well we'll have to review a bunch of code including auto loader
[00:42:38] <rxu> Dicky : hey, commits in #628 looks messed up
[00:42:42] <naderman> an-: well all the prefixed class/function names?
[00:42:49] <an-> this is for extensions
[00:42:58] <naderman> well auto loader is for everything
[00:43:07] <an-> we always start with path and then we get class names, correct?
[00:43:07] <naderman> would be kind of weird to use this for extensions but nothing else?
[00:43:11] <naderman> what?
[00:43:16] <naderman> the idea was:
[00:43:19] <an-> we can transform to namespace::class name somewhere in the core?
[00:43:24] <an-> and then that will work?
[00:43:29] <naderman> phpbb\ext\foo_bar\my\class_name
[00:43:38] <an-> oh
[00:43:39] <naderman> no?
[00:43:41] <an-> hm
[00:43:43] <an-> i don't know
[00:43:47] <naderman> well that would be the proper way
[00:43:49] <naderman> \ => /
[00:43:52] <naderman> _ => _
[00:43:53] <an-> i tried my best to stay away from backslashes in php
[00:43:53] <naderman> done
[00:45:12] <an-> backslashes are a pain to type
[00:45:34] <naderman> well survivable :P
[00:45:43] <naderman> well I recommend you think about this naming thing a bit
[00:45:50] <naderman> maybe you come up with something more workable than me
[00:46:11] <naderman> I kind of gave up on this and decided I don't care if extensions have longanddifficulttounderstandnames
[00:46:17] <an-> and i have some fairly standard non-us keyboard on this laptop
[00:46:33] <an-> which means they are a pain to type for a significant portion of the world
[00:46:37] <-- onealns (~onealns@cpe-184-57-234-53.cinci.res.rr.com) has quit
[00:47:11] <an-> and i have to convert all of the code
[00:47:15] <an-> adding insult to injury
[00:47:44] <unknownbliss> DavidIQ (and naderman) ready for me to force push and break it?
[00:47:50] <an-> extensions have a separate autoloader
[00:48:04] <an-> what if for extensions we allow underscores in extension name?
[00:48:14] <an-> which would be 3rd level in class names and 2nd level in paths
[00:48:15] <naderman> unknownbliss: what?
[00:48:20] <naderman> no force push ever
[00:48:21] <naderman> wtf
[00:48:33] <naderman> unknownbliss: what are you force pushing to?
[00:48:35] <unknownbliss> A revert was messed up in the titania repo
[00:48:44] <naderman> why does that require a force push?
[00:48:52] <naderman> can't you just commit proper reverts?
[00:49:05] <naderman> the rule really is very simple
[00:49:14] <naderman> never ever force push to a public repo other people use
[00:49:29] <an-> you can also do creative merging with the ours strategy to reset one tree to another
[00:49:44] <naderman> an-: well there are plenty of options
[00:49:48] <naderman> force push isn't one of them
[00:50:02] <unknownbliss> Raimon reverted a branch merge to revert two commits. Then he reverted a merge commit.
[00:50:09] <an-> yeah you probably shouldn't force push ever
[00:50:25] <naderman> an-: well to a canonical repo like phpbb3 or customisation-db anyway
[00:50:29] <an-> github prs get screwed up quite spectacularly if you do, as i recently noticed
[00:50:35] <an-> that's what i meant
[00:50:39] <naderman> yeah
[00:51:03] <naderman> unknownbliss: so?
[00:51:20] <unknownbliss> so it should be rebased out?
[00:51:23] <naderman> no
[00:51:28] <naderman> it's the official repo
[00:51:31] <unknownbliss> ok
[00:51:31] <naderman> nothing gets rebased out
[00:51:38] <naderman> if there was a revert, then there was a revert
[00:51:50] <naderman> you don't get to rewrite history in the official repo
[00:52:18] <naderman> it's unfortunate, but people should just learn from the mistake and avoid it next time
[00:52:24] <unknownbliss> ok
[00:54:19] <an-> unknownbliss: https://github.com/p-scratch/temp1/tree/master/ext/indexpagetitle
[00:54:47] <an-> take care not to enable the other extension
[00:56:42] <an-> you create event/*_subscriber.php files
[00:56:55] <an-> as many as you want
[00:56:57] <unknownbliss> hm...
[00:56:58] <unknownbliss> nice
[00:57:03] <an-> inside of each you have         static public function get_subscribed_events()
[00:57:17] <an-> there you define which events you receive
[00:57:38] <an-> the simplest option is you have an instance function for each event like i have done
[00:57:46] <an-> then you just need the ledge name and the name of the function
[00:58:12] <an-> event handlers (there would be hooks in our terminology) receive $event as the argument
[00:58:23] <an-> you can use array access to get and set variables/parameters
[00:58:38] <an-> you can only set the parameters that are given to the event
[00:58:51] <an-> technically the hook can set other parameters but they will be ignored by the core
[00:59:34] <an-> honestly i'd rather have smashed extension names than backslashes
[00:59:49] <an-> so someone else can then deal with this particular issue
[01:00:08] <naderman> well backslashes are also just a character
[01:00:11] <naderman> don't find that so bad
[01:00:22] <naderman> the semantics of namespaces and use statements is a bit more worrying I think
[01:00:34] <an-> on my keyboard backslash is 1. under a pinky 2. half the size of other letter keys
[01:00:41] <an-> 3. next to enter
[01:00:46] <naderman> I mean you can't just do function foo\bar\lala
[01:00:57] <naderman> but you need the respective namespace statements
[01:01:00] <an-> i mistype it twice as much as i enter it correctly
[01:01:06] <naderman> and make sure it doesn't apply to old functions without namespace
[01:01:07] <naderman> etc.
[01:01:26] <an-> and every other time i screw it up i have to backspace over an entire line worth of indentation
[01:01:30] <imkingdavid> imo if we can't have namespaces or _ we should use camelCase
[01:01:36] <imkingdavid> but I don't mind namespaces
[01:03:33] <an-> (21:03:58) naderman: the semantics of namespaces and use statements is a bit more worrying I think - which is?
[01:03:44] <an-> surely they couldn't have gotten *that* wrong
[01:03:55] <naderman> an-: those two vs. the fact that there are backslashes
[01:04:19] <an-> hmm? didn't parse at all
[01:04:22] <naderman> an-: no, but it means even more change if we want to use it instead of prefixing
[01:04:37] <an-> ah
[01:04:44] <naderman> an-: you said you dislike backslashes => I say, I'm more worried about namespace semantics (part of which is use statements)
[01:05:14] <an-> does that mean you are not in favor of namespaces?
[01:05:18] <naderman> I am
[01:05:27] <naderman> just not sure how good an idea it is to change this for 3.1 now
[01:05:34] <an-> ok
[01:05:36] <an-> how about
[01:05:39] <an-> no backslashes and no camelcase
[01:05:43] <an-> what else can we have
[01:05:50] <naderman> yeah that's what I kept asking
[01:05:53] <naderman> but really no idea
[01:06:07] <imkingdavid> backwards camelcase? IaMaNeXTENSION? :P lol just kidding
[01:06:10] <imkingdavid> idk
[01:06:34] <imkingdavid> might just have to have longnameslikethis
[01:06:56] <an-> ^ php did that for the first 4 versions most of the time
[01:07:15] <an-> obviously they couldn't have been doing it all of the time, that would be heresy
[01:07:45] <unknownbliss> an-: Sorry, I missed that as I was fiddling with titania.
[01:07:47] <an-> python does that frequently also
[01:07:57] <an-> it's not that bad really
[01:08:09] <unknownbliss> whats wrong with normal extension names with underscores and forward slashes?
[01:08:26] <naderman> unknownbliss: underscores do not work
[01:08:31] <an-> can't have underscores in directory names that have classes which we autoload
[01:08:34] <naderman> unknownbliss: dir names must not contain underscores
[01:08:39] <unknownbliss> ah
[01:09:00] <naderman> which really is kind of fail, because everyone will try to use that
[01:09:05] <unknownbliss> so extension clean names can't use underscores either now?
[01:09:15] <an-> phpbb_ext_indexpagetitle_event_index_page_title_subscriber
[01:09:19] <an-> it's not terrible really
[01:09:23] <an-> you can see where the extension name is
[01:09:29] <naderman> indeed
[01:09:30] <unknownbliss> in that case I'm going to set the extensions manager to show on the list view the display name from the extension.json
[01:09:42] <unknownbliss> so on the UI they see the nice name, not the clean one
[01:09:44] <naderman> an-: "it's not terrible" is why I just left it like that in the end
[01:09:49] <unknownbliss> extensions admin*
[01:09:52] <naderman> unknownbliss: you can have underscores in the name
[01:09:59] <naderman> unknownbliss: it means they are in a subdirectory
[01:10:04] <unknownbliss> oh
[01:10:13] <naderman> e.g. ext/foo/extensionone ext/foo/extensiontwo
[01:10:13] <an-> naderman: are we talking about the same thing?
[01:10:18] <naderman> is foo_extensionone
[01:10:22] <naderman> and foo_extensiontwo
[01:10:28] <an-> hmm
[01:10:29] <unknownbliss> ok
[01:10:30] <naderman> but the extension is not in ext/foo
[01:10:37] <an-> what was the reasoning behind extensions in subdirectories again?
[01:10:43] <naderman> an-: I also didn't have this at first, but then you and other forced me to add subdirectories
[01:10:48] <imkingdavid> an-: venders
[01:10:50] <naderman> an-: well grouping extensions by vendor
[01:10:52] <unknownbliss> so you could have vendor then name
[01:10:52] <imkingdavid> I think
[01:10:56] <unknownbliss> yeah
[01:11:03] <an-> should really not use swear words
[01:11:08] <naderman> lol
[01:11:12] <an-> s/vendor/author/
[01:11:13] <unknownbliss> hm?
[01:11:20] <unknownbliss> oh
[01:11:26] <naderman> an-: you really are hardcore free software
[01:11:27] <naderman> :P
[01:11:31] <unknownbliss> he
[01:11:44] <an-> no, vendor means you copy someone else's project into your tree
[01:11:55] <naderman> vendor means they sold you software
[01:12:08] <an-> sure
[01:12:11] <imkingdavid> semantics :P
[01:12:16] <naderman> doesn't have anything to do with copying
[01:12:18] <an-> but the bigger confusion is what i just said
[01:12:22] <unknownbliss> vendor means a machine you get nice snacks out of
[01:12:24] <unknownbliss> :P
[01:12:30] <naderman> why would vendor have anything to do with copying
[01:12:45] <naderman> vendor == 3rd party providing code
[01:12:47] <an-> copying or git submodules
[01:12:50] <an-> yes
[01:12:57] <naderman> and if ext/<some vendor>/foobar
[01:13:00] <an-> so when you say "vendor" and there is no 3rd party code involved it's confusing
[01:13:00] <naderman> then that is exactly it
[01:13:10] <naderman> that vendor <some vendor> provided you with 3rd party extension foobar
[01:13:32] <imkingdavid> extensions are 3rd party
[01:13:33] <an-> well a vendor provided you with phpbb
[01:13:34] <naderman> if you are working on the extension you are the vendor of that extension
[01:13:40] <naderman> yes phpbb is a vendor
[01:13:46] <naderman> ext/phpbb/coreext would work well
[01:14:03] <an-> but that's not people mean when they say "vendored code"
[01:14:18] <naderman> that's what people mean when they use the word vendor
[01:14:25] <an-> that means, "i took that code and copied it into my tree instead of using a copy installed already elsewhere"
[01:14:31] <naderman> "vendored" is some weird verb formed from some misconception of the noun vendor
[01:14:39] <naderman> an-: you're doing too much rails really
[01:14:49] <an-> you do the same thing in composer, don't you?
[01:14:52] <unknownbliss> anyway
[01:15:06] <naderman> an-: in composer we call the directory containing 3rd party code the "vendor" directory
[01:15:10] <an-> php land is borrowing this meaning from rails
[01:15:20] <naderman> in which every project is stored under <vendor name>/<project name>
[01:15:23] <unknownbliss> vendor = providor of software or 3rd party software depending on the context
[01:15:30] <naderman> an-: the verb "vendor" is never used
[01:15:36] <naderman> unknownbliss: exactly
[01:15:48] <unknownbliss> so, moving on. :P
[01:15:50] <an-> can we just use author and get on with it?
[01:15:53] <naderman> no
[01:15:56] <naderman> vendor is correct
[01:16:00] <naderman> it's not necessarily the author
[01:16:04] <naderman> it is definitely the vendor
[01:16:07] <unknownbliss> for example
[01:16:26] <unknownbliss> my blog extension with ikd. There are three of us so we just go for phpBB Blog vendor
[01:17:02] <unknownbliss> phpBB doesn't have an author, but it has a vendor. :)
[01:18:01] <an-> +require($phpbb_root_path . 'vendor/.composer/autoload.php');
[01:18:14] <an-> does vendor there have the same meaning as the one you are attaching to it in the current conversation?
[01:20:17] <an-> https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/529/files is the url for that
[01:20:43] <naderman> an-: yes
[01:21:02] <naderman> vendor/ == code from vendors vendor/.composer == code from vendor composer
[01:21:20] <an-> ok let's move on
[01:22:37] <unknownbliss> an- and naderman: Casting votes on args vs params
[01:22:43] <unknownbliss> args makes more sense
[01:22:55] <naderman> unknownbliss: huh?
[01:22:58] <naderman> arguments or parameters
[01:23:03] <naderman> neither of your options
[01:23:13] <naderman> typically parameters is what you want
[01:23:18] <unknownbliss> hm...
[01:23:20] <naderman> well no
[01:23:25] <naderman> arguments are solely numbered
[01:23:28] <naderman> but unnamed
[01:23:33] <naderman> unknownbliss: what is this about anyway?
[01:23:40] <naderman> unknownbliss: don't use abbreviations without good reason
[01:23:45] <unknownbliss> sorry
[01:23:51] <naderman> couply extra characters don't hurt normally
[01:23:58] -*- unknownbliss has a good reason. Its half past 1 AM
[01:23:58] <naderman> and using full word often helps understanding
[01:24:00] <unknownbliss> :P
[01:24:02] <naderman> *couple
[01:24:11] <naderman> *words
[01:24:14] <naderman> time for bed
[01:24:16] <unknownbliss> normally I dont. I'm just tired. :P
[01:24:17] <DavidIQ> unless it's called phpBBasicSupercalifragilisticespialidocious
[01:24:17] <unknownbliss> nah
[01:24:33] <an-> A parameter is the variable which is part of the method's signature  (method declaration).  An argument is an expression used when calling  the method.
[01:24:39] <an-> from that definition it's parameter
[01:24:42] <an-> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1788923/parameter-vs-argument
[01:24:51] -*- naderman hits DavidIQ with his DavidIQOnTheHeadHitHammerWithExtraSpikesWhichHurtVeryMuch
[01:24:53] <imkingdavid> argument
[01:25:06] <DavidIQ> lol
[01:25:09] <an-> Parameters are the things defined by functions as input, arguments are the things passed as parameters.
[01:25:11] <naderman> an-: thanks that makes sense
[01:25:15] <an-> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/427653/arguments-or-parameters
[01:25:19] -*- DavidIQ gets some ice while grumbling un-niceties at naderman 
[01:25:21] <an-> someone else linked to this earlier
[01:26:30] <an-> Rinat has the Formal definition--what you have isn't wrong, but it isn't quite right either - ???
[01:26:56] <naderman> well I'm off to bed, night
[01:27:20] <an-> "argument name" sounds quite wrong
[01:28:20] <an-> There is already a Wikipedia entry on the subject (see Parameter) that defines and distinguishes the terms parameter and argument.  In short, a parameter is part of the function/procedure/method  signature and an argument is the actual value supplied at run-time  and/or call-site for the parameter.
[01:28:24] <an-> wikipedia cannot be wrong
[01:28:28] <an-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parameter_%28computer_science%29
[01:29:08] <an-> In the most common case, call-by-value, a parameter acts within the subroutine as a local (isolated) copy of the argument,
[01:29:17] <an-> try to flip the words in that sentence
[01:29:39] <an-> also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parameter_%28computer_programming%29#Parameters_and_arguments
[01:30:45] <naderman> In the least common case, call-by-reference, an argument acts outside the subroutine as a global (shared) copy of the parameter
[01:30:46] <naderman> works
[01:30:50] <naderman> or not
[01:30:52] <naderman> well sort of
[01:31:24] <naderman> not really a copy if it's a reference
[01:31:32] <an-> well my vote is parameter as consistent with everything i just posted
[01:31:35] <naderman> although I replaced copy only in one place so my fault
[01:31:39] <naderman> an-: yes
[01:31:40] <naderman> absolutely
[01:32:12] <an-> we also need to consider events/listeners vs hooks/ledges
[01:32:34] <an-> problem is we do expose events and listeners to extensions
[01:32:36] <an-> see https://github.com/p-scratch/temp1/blob/master/ext/indexpagetitle/event/index_page_title_subscriber.php
[01:33:07] <an-> i would consider editing those interfaces to use ledge vocabulary
[01:34:18] <Dicky> rxu, re: PR 628, I have no idea how those commits got there and I do not know how to fix.
[01:34:31] <an-> rxu: Dicky i'll take care of it
[01:34:38] <naderman> an-: I generally think event/listener is better
[01:34:43] <naderman> simply because it's more commonly used
[01:34:45] <an-> commit message needs to be adjusted also
[01:34:54] <-- nickvergessen (~unknown@phpbb/developer/nickvergessen) has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
[01:35:06] <an-> what about conflicts with our glorious nonexistent event system?
[01:35:23] <naderman> an-: call those hooks if we ever get it
[01:35:26] <naderman> or "user events"?
[01:35:29] <naderman> or something else
[01:35:37] <naderman> let's cross that bridge once we get there
[01:35:54] <an-> so RUNHOOKS -> event?
[01:35:59] <rxu> an- : thanks
[01:36:05] <naderman> an-: yup
[01:36:16] <naderman> a template event or some such
[01:36:26] <naderman> could do
[01:36:31] <naderman> TRIGGER_EVENT
[01:36:32] <naderman> or so
[01:36:36] <naderman> if you want a verb
[01:36:44] <an-> i think event is sufficient
[01:36:49] <naderman> k
[01:37:02] <unknownbliss> right so we are events/listeners and parameters?
[01:37:07] <naderman> yup
[01:37:09] <an-> php code already uses events
[01:37:20] <an-> hooks -> listeners?
[01:37:26] <an-> ledges -> ???
[01:37:35] <naderman> ledge -> event
[01:37:37] <naderman> hook -> listener
[01:37:41] <an-> ledge is a location
[01:37:44] <an-> event is a container
[01:37:50] <naderman> an-: no
[01:38:19] <naderman> an-: an even has some place/location that triggered it
[01:38:28] <naderman> so the event is really all you need to talk about
[01:38:34] <naderman> because an event always implies its source
[01:38:35] <an-> event is a happening
[01:38:38] <naderman> yes
[01:38:39] <an-> it is not a location
[01:38:43] <naderman> a happening at a location
[01:38:52] <naderman> the event tells you the location
[01:39:08] <an-> not if we trigger it in more than one place
[01:39:20] <an-> but then we'd have to reuse ledge names also
[01:39:25] <naderman> well then ledge before was just as ambiguous
[01:39:34] -*- unknownbliss is confused
[01:39:37] <rxu> ledge is more a hook object for me
[01:39:43] <naderman> huh
[01:39:44] <naderman> it never was
[01:39:59] <naderman> an-: I think an event that could have been triggered multiple ways is just fine
[01:40:04] <naderman> the terminology still makes sense
[01:40:16] <naderman> an-: but in most cases you don't want to trigger the same event in multiple places anyway
[01:40:17] <an-> i will attempt to reformulate the hooks commits in events and listeners
[01:40:27] <naderman> because you do want them to be distinguishible
[01:40:32] <unknownbliss> ledge -> ?
[01:40:32] <unknownbliss> hook -> ?
[01:40:33] <naderman> can still attach the same listener two both events
[01:40:42] <naderman> unknownbliss:
[01:40:42] <naderman> [02:37:35] <naderman> ledge -> event
[01:40:43] <naderman> [02:37:37] <naderman> hook -> listener
[01:40:47] <unknownbliss> oh sorry
[01:40:56] <unknownbliss> hm...
[01:40:57] <unknownbliss> ok
[01:41:06] <rxu> naderman : it's referred as 'hook location' for now
[01:41:07] <naderman> an-: same event really shouldn't be triggered in multiple places I think
[01:41:20] <naderman> rxu: well it's not an object
[01:41:31] <naderman> rxu: hook location is not an object, ledge is not an object
[01:41:39] <rxu> I didn't mean OOP object
[01:41:41] <naderman> so I don't understand?
[01:41:42] <an-> well if we copy paste code we might copy paste event invocations with it
[01:41:42] <naderman> oh
[01:41:47] <naderman> rxu: what then?
[01:41:49] <an-> other than that probably not
[01:41:55] <unknownbliss> rxu: http://wiki.phpbb.com/Add_Ledges
[01:42:10] <rxu> probably just bad wording... instance?
[01:42:16] <naderman> an-: well I wouldn't entirely rule it out, but I don't think it'll be common enough to warrant consideration regarding the name
[01:42:26] <naderman> rxu: instance of what?
[01:42:36] <rxu> of hook
[01:42:45] <naderman> no that's bad wording too
[01:42:46] <rxu> system
[01:42:53] <rxu> ok
[01:42:56] <rxu> :))
[01:43:02] <naderman> rxu: one "hook location/ledge/event" can cause many "hooks/listeners" to be executed
[01:43:07] <naderman> so it's not an "instance"
[01:43:56] <naderman> triggering events, which are then processed by listeners makes perfect sense
[01:43:59] <unknownbliss> what happens if two events/ledges have the same name?
[01:44:05] <unknownbliss> same identifier*
[01:44:10] <naderman> unknownbliss: we just discussed that
[01:44:16] <naderman> unknownbliss: read my above conversation with an-
[01:44:33] <naderman> [02:39:08] <an-> not if we trigger it in more than one place
[01:44:33] <naderman> [02:39:20] <an-> but then we'd have to reuse ledge names also
[01:44:36] <naderman> [02:39:25] <naderman> well then ledge before was just as ambiguous
[01:44:42] <unknownbliss> hm...
[01:44:45] <naderman> [02:39:59] <naderman> an-: I think an event that could have been triggered multiple ways is just fine
[01:44:45] <naderman> [02:40:04] <naderman> the terminology still makes sense
[01:44:45] <naderman> [02:40:16] <naderman> an-: but in most cases you don't want to trigger the same event in multiple places anyway
[01:44:50] <naderman> [02:40:27] <naderman> because you do want them to be distinguishible
[01:44:54] <naderman> [02:41:07] <naderman> an-: same event really shouldn't be triggered in multiple places I think
[01:45:00] <naderman> [02:41:42] <an-> well if we copy paste code we might copy paste event invocations with it
[01:45:05] <naderman> [02:41:49] <an-> other than that probably not
[01:45:09] <naderman> [02:42:16] <naderman> an-: well I wouldn't entirely rule it out, but I don't think it'll be common enough to warrant consideration regarding the name
[01:45:17] <naderman> unknownbliss: understood?
[01:45:22] <unknownbliss> yep, thanks
[01:45:36] <unknownbliss> sorry, my brain is half asleep
[01:45:42] <naderman> mine too ^_^
[01:45:47] <naderman> time for sleep for real now
[01:45:48] <naderman> night
[01:47:06] <unknownbliss> night