From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP,NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10ad19,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10ad19,public X-Google-Thread: 1073c2,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid1073c2,public X-Google-Thread: 101deb,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 11440e,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid11440e,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 107a89,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid107a89,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-05-29 08:12:33 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.stealth.net!proxad.net!freenix!grolier!newsfeed.planete.net!psinet-france!psiuk-f4!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.awk,comp.lang.clarion,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.vrml Subject: Re: Long names are doom ? Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 10:55:31 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9f0d96$j3t$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <3B0DBD4A.82943473@my-deja.net> <9ekrc2$hk0$1@news.fsu.edu> <9eln0p$24p$1@nh.pace.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: 136.170.200.133 X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 991148134 19581 136.170.200.133 (29 May 2001 14:55:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 29 May 2001 14:55:34 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ruby:10140 comp.lang.ada:7845 comp.lang.awk:2627 comp.lang.clarion:20548 comp.lang.java.programmer:71665 comp.lang.pl1:676 comp.lang.vrml:3373 Date: 2001-05-29T14:55:34+00:00 List-Id: I probably should have put a :-) next to that comment. See "A Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy" If you've followed my other comments in this thread, you'll know that I'm in favor of specific projects deciding for themselves what (and even if) limits should be imposed on identifiers. I am strongly against language & compiler designers deciding this issue for you by placing arbitrary and capricious limits on identifiers. (Beyond what is necessary for practical engineering concerns. These days, if there is going to be a limit at all {and I don't think there needs to be} it ought to stem from line lengths in source files or be set to some really big number that in practice will never be exceeded - like 256 or 512.) MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Roedy Green" wrote in message news:cubtgtcnrrnkb1nj3khtapapse7cbsl20q@4ax.com... > On Fri, 25 May 2001 09:34:15 -0400, "Marin David Condic" > wrote or quoted : > > >If you're going to have an arbitrary and capricious limit on identifier > >length, then 42 is a better number than 31. > > You could ask it this way. Who is better able to judge whether a given > long variable is justified, somebody versed in the project or somebody > who has never seen it? > > This is a matter of style, and such a thing MIGHT be enforceable on a > PROJECT basis. > > I would like it if there were lint-like tools that guarded the > repository. They would beautify code to project standards, and > enforce restrictions decided on a per-project basis. > > They would enforce the naming rules, see Coding Conventions in the > Java glossary. > > You might even demand that each element of a variable name live in a > dictionary. What drives me nuts is maintaining somebody else's code > who can't spell. > > I could imagine that a SCID would have a project dictionary with > special terminology carefully defined. Coming cold into a project > learning the undocumented vocabulary is the hardest thing. All words > used in variable names would have to be defined if the standard Oxford > definition did not suffice. > > We need to evolve computer languages more toward communication: human > <=> human and machine => human, rather than just human => machine. > > One example would be avoiding nested scope to resolve ambiguity. > Computers have no problem with it, but in many cases it befuddles > humans. > > > - > For more detail, please look up the key words mentioned in this post in > the Java Glossary at: > http://mindprod.com/gloss.html or http://209.153.246.39/gloss.html > If you don't see what you were looking for, complain! > or send your contribution for the glossary. > -- > Roedy Green, Canadian Mind Products > Custom computer programming since 1963. > Almost ready to take on new work. >