add named parameters and correct types for some natives

[coalaura]

No description provided.

[DevDaddyJacob]

Also overall I don't think you need to prefix each parameter with a letter representing the type of the parameter as the types are described in the native documentation anyway.

[PsychoShock]

Also overall I don't think you need to prefix each parameter with a letter representing the type of the parameter as the types are described in the native documentation anyway.

Yes you need to that. This is call having a signature structure in the code.

Also, instead of spamming the same review comment for everything, please only make one. This is not a good way to review something.

[DevDaddyJacob]

Also overall I don't think you need to prefix each parameter with a letter representing the type of the parameter as the types are described in the native documentation anyway.

Yes you need to that. This is call having a signature structure in the code.

Also, instead of spamming the same review comment for everything, please only make one. This is not a good way to review something.

Apologies regarding the repetition comments, still new to this GitHub mobile app and just now figured out I can I select multiple lines.

As for the prefixing, it doesn't seem to be the standard across other exiting natives.
Also if we were to do a signature structure, would be nice to have it on all the parameters not just some of them in the effected natives for this Pr, unless there is some reasoning I'm not seeing here.

I suppose where I'm getting confused is why is it required, yet not something being enforced across the repo from what I'm seeing right now.
I may be missing something or having a different perception of this so maybe you could help me see where you coming from.

[AvarianKnight]

There's a mismatch of naming scheme all across the native list, using iSomeType, fSomeType, etc is fine (and probably more useful, considering Lua and JS show as number or integer which don't really get the point across of their types)

[DevDaddyJacob]

There's a mismatch of naming scheme all across the native list, using iSomeType, fSomeType, etc is fine (and probably more useful, considering Lua and JS show as number or integer which don't really get the point across of their types)

Gotcha, thank you for that input.
My comment was coming from a consistency standpoint, but what I'm gathering is that there isn't a set requirement one way or the other so that is good to know.

With that said, considering what you wrote regarding the benefits for Lua and JS, perhaps we could explore the idea of adding a standard for parameter names to the contributor guidelines for PRs moving forward?

[coalaura]

I personally don't care either way, prefix or not. I figured for completions sake i'd use the name as its defined, however i do agree that this is not the standard across other native documentations. Let me know and i'll adjust them either way.

Add some parameter description if possible

@JayPaulinCodes i added as much documentation as i was able to provide, figured i would still push it even if its just the parameters being renamed. A bit of progress is better than none was my thought.

[DevDaddyJacob]

@coalaura How did you find the names for the params again?

[coalaura]

@coalaura How did you find the names for the params again?

anchient sourcery and witchcraft

[DevDaddyJacob]

@coalaura How did you find the names for the params again?

anchient sourcery and witchcraft

My train of thought was that if we had enough knowledge to find a accurate name for the param, I feel like we would have enough to give the parameter some form of description, but if that isn't the case so be it.

[coalaura]

My train of thought was that if we had enough knowledge to find a accurate name for the param, I feel like we would have enough to give the parameter some form of description, but if that isn't the case so be it.

The issue is more with my limited knowledge of c++. I try to figure out what it does as best as i can in some cases its above my head tho. I will go through one more time and try to add documentation where i can :)

Edit: Went through all the natives i changed one more time and updated the documentation as best as i could.

[AvarianKnight]

Initial review, only looked at types will review in more detail later.