name change for glm_euler_sq

[superbigio]

Hi,

This is a minor suggestion. I find glm_euler_sq a little misleading as a name since the accepted convention in c (and other languages) is for "sq" as an abbreviation to usually mean square or squared (e.g. sqrt()). Why don't you change the name to glm_euler_seq? It is only a character longer but it conveys the meaning much more clearly. Alternatively, since I suspect this enum won't be used very often you could also go with glm_euler_sequence without the need of shortening the name.

[recp]

Hi @superbigio

Thanks for your proposal!

Why don't you change the name to glm_euler_seq?

Because I like short names :)

Yes glm_euler_seq seems better one. Would you like to create a Pull Request? Or I can add it to my TODOs.

We should maintain thee old type for a while, to do that we could use something like this:

typedef glm_euler_seq glm_euler_sq;

In this way the change will be compatible with previous versions...

FWIW, there is also another issue about Euler angles: #30

[superbigio]

Hi Recep, sorry for my late reply...Yes, I'll create a Pull request right away. There are also some features I would like to add and issues I would like to resolve.Yes, the issue about Euler angles is one of them. I will open issues on Github as I move forward so we can discuss everyone of them. Best - Luigi On Saturday, August 17, 2019, 8:13:23 AM GMT+2, Recep Aslantas <[email protected]> wrote: Hi @superbigio Thanks for your proposal! Why don't you change the name to glm_euler_seq? Because I like short names :) Yes glm_euler_seq seems better one. Would you like to create a Pull Request? Or I can add it to my TODOs. We should maintain thee old type for a while, to do that we could use something like this: typedef glm_euler_seq glm_euler_sq; In this way the change will be compatible with previous versions... FWIW, there is also another issue about Euler angles: #30 — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[recp]

This is fixed at #94