Is the CG prefix a good design choice? about mtgeometry

[atomkirk]

Right, I spent a lot of time thinking about this. I really hesitated to use the CG prefix, it did indeed seem like a bad idea, but I decided to bet against the house and go for consistency. These are functions I feel like Apple should have included in the first place, so the CG prefix sedates my annoyance and I get to pretend as if they did :). If Apple does introduce more CGGeometry functions (I do not predict they will) I'll just remove any colliding functions since now it's built into the CoreGraphics framework and thats even better than a third party library ;) In summary: The benefit of consistency outweighed the very slim chance of a naming collision.

[luca-bernardi]

This make totally sense. I found myself in the same position when I was extending MapKit.framework adding my own data structure, but in the end I decided to use my prefix. Again this is only a matter of taste, I think that this discussion will be useful as future reference.