I think adding a node might be a better naming convention.
When you add, it is pretty obvious, that it is added as a child.
When adding a node I also always type in add_no... and than am confused why autocomplete is not proposing anything.
The main point though is: that get_node also is relative to the current node.
this is not consistent:
add_child(test_node)
get_node("test_node")
this would be consistent:
add_node(test_node)
get_node("test_node")
add_child
makes it clear there is a parent/child relationship. get_node
can access any node in the scene tree, not only direct children.
I had the same thought some time ago.
I think the add_n...
happens only when you use get_node
alot and then try to add a child.
Maybe this won't happen in 3.0 anymore if the new notation $...
will be used instead of get_node
.
@AlexHolly oh that is a good point you bring up!
Should I close?
Yep, @neikeq summed up why the current API is fine already IMO.
Most helpful comment
add_child
makes it clear there is a parent/child relationship.get_node
can access any node in the scene tree, not only direct children.