MM_ for Master Materials, and new name for Master Materials

[Allar]

Originally posted by @miltoncandelero in https://github.com/Allar/ue5-style-guide/discussions/65#discussioncomment-979199

I do have an idea, can we use MM_ for Master Materials? It would be an easy way to mark that the material is meant to be Instantiated and not used as-is 🤔

[Allar]

I believe it is in everyone's best interest if we stop calling them Master Materials and named them something else.

I'm currently leaning towards Material Base (MB_) myself.

https://twitter.com/MichaelAllar/status/1413108447978000388

[pfist]

I believe it is in everyone's best interest if we stop calling them Master Materials and named them something else.

I like the idea and the opportunity for clarity it provides, but I'm curious: What is the motivation behind this proposal? Why is it in everyone's best interest to change a well-known convention?

[lucastucious]

I kind of like the way that if you use filter (the way that this guide is written), with only M_ as a prefix, Master material stand out above Material Instance

EDIT : As Unreal himself call Base-Material "Material", I don't think we should add something else. Think of it as "true" material .

[Allar]

I believe it is in everyone's best interest if we stop calling them Master Materials and named them something else.

I like the idea and the opportunity for clarity it provides, but I'm curious: What is the motivation behind this proposal? Why is it in everyone's best interest to change a well-known convention?

I think any and all attempts to move away from master/slave terminology will ultimately improve tech culture. It can be a big problem but only requires a very small solution.

[QuinnCG]

I believe it is in everyone's best interest if we stop calling them Master Materials and named them something else.

I like the idea and the opportunity for clarity it provides, but I'm curious: What is the motivation behind this proposal? Why is it in everyone's best interest to change a well-known convention?

I think any and all attempts to move away from master/slave terminology will ultimately improve tech culture. It can be a big problem but only requires a very small solution.

There's no slave terminology. You instantiate the master material and have an instance of said material. No one's thinking slave material. It's akin to the parent/child terminology but in that case, parent and child are both words/concepts that are actually used.