On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 12:51:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Brendan Jurd" <direvus@gmail.com> writes:
> > char * text_cstring(const text *t)
>
> What do people think of text_to_cstring?
I tend to put things the other way around in my code, i.e:
char * cstring_of_text(const text *t)
mainly because things read more easily---type definitions of new
variables are next to the first part of the word.
char * str = cstring_of_text(src_text);
vs. char * str = text_to_cstring(src_text);
I think I got my original inspiration for doing it this way around from
the Caml language.
Sam
