Hey, I am playing with Amper. The DevXP is pretty ...

# amper

[sdeleuze]

Hey, I am playing with Amper. The DevXP is pretty nice. Looking forward to see the upcoming plugin mechanism to get a better idea of what it will look like.

Not sure if it has been already discussed, and I am not a native english speaker, but my first surprise/friction is this product term. Looks a bit weird to me, could somebody explain the reasoning behind the choice of that word ?

I am also a bit confused by the mix of camel case and - separators. Do you plan to continue mixing both, and if yes with which rules?

Do you plan to provide Yaml schemas that could be used easily by other IDEs to provide basic autocomplete and documentation?

[Anton Prokhorov]

Hi there! Thanks for the positive feedback!

> Do you plan to provide Yaml schemas that could be used easily by other IDEs to provide basic autocomplete and documentation?
There is a schema here. It's unofficial though, like, I mean no guarantees about compatibility and stuff. Also we may want to replace schema to something else in future (for example, we may continue developing AmperLang and it goes far beyond json schema could cover, so we may need to come up with something else)

> Not sure if it has been already discussed, and I am not a native english speaker, but my first surprise/friction is this product term. Looks a bit weird to me, could somebody explain the reasoning behind the choice of that word ?
I already don't remember the exact details, but let me try to explain it anyway:

We needed a word, that would describe "something that you build". It's not an artifact, because one product can produce multiple artifacts, it could be a module type maybe, however, the idea that product describes what you build and what for (like platforms) sat okay-ish, at least better than alternatives. There were funny options on the table, like Pot, because we called modules potatoes 😄

In other build systems, it is called differently, like, in XCode and Swift PM it is called product as well. In cargo it is called crate, in MSBuild it is called assembly

Because naming is hard

If you have better alternatives, please feel free to propose!

> I am also a bit confused by the mix of camel case and - separators. Do you plan to continue mixing both, and if yes with which rules?
good question: it seems that for now the convention is:

for the top level properties we use - for everything else - camelCase

I think it happened accidentally and we need to decide on the case and make it consistent