First, my message was *defending* most of the short names
that someone else was attacking.  For the record, I am
*far* more worried about the fragility of typical Smalltalk
code than I am about method names, which are generally
pretty good.

Second, the criterion was implicit but fairly clear:
if an abbreviation of any kind is sufficiently common
that someone who wants the semantics will recognise the
identifier, use it.  "ulp" is MORE familiar to people
who need it than "unitOfLeastPrecision" (spit), so it is
a better name.  In the same way, HTTP is a *better* name
than HyperTextWhatever (amongst other things because the
word is Hypertext, so HyperText violates a Smalltalk style
rule that says internal capitals at *word* boundaries)
because it is familiar and takes less effort to recognise
than the fully spelled out thing.

Third, the rule as always is "intention-revealing names".
(Another Smalltalk style rule that I did not invent.)
#onDNU:do: is a confusing name because when I saw it I
expected the first argument to be a signalled exception,
not a selector.   There is nothing wrong with the DNU bit;
if you know you want to catch a DNU you are probably
familiar with "DNU" (and don't want to fuss with whether
it means Does Not Understand or Did Not Understand).
As a particular example from the list, #log or
#logarithm are both ambiguous, while #ln is NOT
ambiguous (in the context of numbers), making it a
better name,

Finally, the significant point was not where I live
(about 1/1600 of the world's population live here)
but when I went to primary school, which was somewhat
more than 50 years ago.  Twenty years before that,
children learned how to calculate square roots by hand.
(Cue Four Yorkshiremen. :-))



On 8 May 2018 at 20:00, Norbert Hartl <norb...@hartl.name> wrote:

>
>
> Am 08.05.2018 um 05:15 schrieb Richard O'Keefe <rao...@gmail.com>:
>
> #gcd:
> #lcm:
>
> These come from elementary (primary school in my day) mathematics.  They
> are the standard names.
>
>
> You mean where you live? That excludes 90% and more of the world. So when
> is a abbreviation ok again?
>
> Norbert
>
>

Reply via email to