Remove Node.get_position_in_parent()

[KoBeWi]

See #21802

[YuriSizov]

Why remove this and not the other? It's shorter and perfectly aligns with the fact that the result will be used as an index argument in a function like get_child.

[Zireael07]

I agree, get_position_in_parent() is waaay too wordy...

[KoBeWi]

I agree, get_position_in_parent() is waaay too wordy...

It's more descriptive though. Maybe we could come up with a completely new name?

[YuriSizov]

I don't think that such function needs a verbose name. It's a function that returns node's index in its parent. Should we call it get_index_in_parent() then? Well, where else would that index be? And this is how we arrive to the get_index() name.

Calling it get_position_in_parent() is too descriptive and this is what documentation is for.

Edit: Also, a "position in parent" may mean something different for 2d and 3d nodes, so that name may even be confusing for some.

[aaronfranke]

get_index_in_parent() is what immediately occurred to me. get_position_in_parent() is a really poor choice of words because "position" means something else for Node2D and Node3D.

[KoBeWi]

How about get_sibling_index?

[aaronfranke]

I think get_sibling_index is not immediately clear that we're getting the index of this node among siblings, since it could also be read as "get the index of another sibling". get_index_among_siblings? I'm still leaning towards get_index_in_parent.

[YuriSizov]

Well, if we must include a reference to the parent, then get_index_in_parent is our only option. Definitely not sibling. That implies that this index has something to do with current node's siblings.

In fact, I can't think of any adjective to put before the word index here, that wouldn't sound ambiguous or even more confusing than without any.

[hubbyist]

get_node_index() maybe? But get_index also implies that node is inside a collection which will have a parent anyway.

[Xrayez]

I agree, get_position_in_parent() is waaay too wordy...

It's more descriptive though. Maybe we could come up with a completely new name?

That's what documentation is for, thanks goodness Godot has good accessibility for docs.

EDIT: oops, literally quoted #37556 (comment).

[aaronfranke]

Since get_index() seems good to many people, we should change this PR to be the opposite of what it currently is, keeping get_index() and removing get_position_in_parent().

This way we can avoid having a duplicate methods for now, and we can maybe rename get_index later if it's desired.

[KoBeWi]

Heh, looks like get_index() was more commonly used in the code. The number of changed lines significantly dropped.

[akien-mga]

Thanks!