A comment in **strong support** of the Julia naming convention: these are 
just my personal impressions:

I think in much of numerical analysis (and to some but lesser extent 
scientific computing) overly short variable names are fairly popular, I 
think because they represent a direct translation of algorithms or formulas 
into code. I guess it never becomes a problem because codes or code blocks 
tend to be short. Similarly, I like `cholfact`; it is completely clear what 
is meant. While I'd be still ok with `cholesky_factorisation`, I think it 
is unnecessary. 

`factorize(Cholesky, ...)` is overdoing it. This is again the mistake of 
sacrificing simplicity of use for elegant language design. So far, Julia 
has relatively few of those. 

Reply via email to