On 04.07.2013, at 13:09, Henrik Johansen <henrik.s.johan...@veloxit.no> wrote:
> > On Jul 4, 2013, at 12:52 , Torsten Bergmann wrote: > >> Usually I thought only the C/C++ people fell in love with abbreviations - >> but >> now its our own community: >> >> in Pharo 3.0 one can write: >> >> Smalltalk os env >> >> or would it be better to use: >> >> Smalltalk operatingSystem environment >> >> in the future? >> >> So is the current >> >> Smalltalk vm >> >> better than >> >> Smalltalk virtualMachine >> >> I know: even a newcomer should know what "OS" means. At least >> Smalltalkers/Java people should >> know they need a "VM". But nonetheless I think a common goal would be to >> keep >> Pharo code and method selectors readable and avoid abbreviations when >> possible. >> >> Also there are Pharo methods like #getEnv: instead of >> #getEnvironmentVariable: >> (interesting that they wrap the native C/C++ API "GetEnvironmentVariableA" >> which does not use abbreviations) >> >> Should we care (with an issue) and use the more readable forms in >> the future and deprecated the abbreviation forms? >> >> Or will we keep abbreviations for the lazy and easier typing? >> >> If you comment please think about the goal to get readable code, the goal to >> get more newcomers into programming and your own first steps with Smalltalk >> and IT ... > > My 2c: > Acronyms work fine, also in method names. (os, vm) > As a basic rule require to spell out ante meridiem, light amplification by > stimulated emission of radiation, radio detection and ranging, compact disk, > and their likes, seems a bit … zealous. Agreed. There are conventional terms that can (and maybe should) be abbreviated. But in general I'm against abbreviations. > > Simple abbreviations, like env, rather than using the full word, I have much > less empathy for. > > Cheers, > Henry
