Re: renaming Interfaces.Java.Ada_To_Java_String to the + operator

[dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)]

Mike says

<<The place where the extra length really matters is when you
have a lot of input to do, say 10000 lines, then you are saving
100000 key strokes, which could be a lot of data input money.

This almost suggests a compromise that unary operators should
have a corresponding function name. Use the function name
for small numbers (say 10 or fewer) instances.

Use the prefix operator when doing large amounts of stuff, like
defining large finite state machines, filling in giant arrays,
making test cases, defining test scenarios for a package body, etc.
>>


I strongly disagree with the above. Which of the two forms is preferable
is a matter of semantic levels of discourse, and if one form is clearer
if used once it is clearer if used 1000 times.

The idea that one should take into account the effort of the writer is
entirely wrong-headed. In the Ada world, we always favor the reader over
the writer. So arguments should always be framed in terms of what will
be easier to read.

If you indeed think that in the case of a single instance, the long name
is always clearer, then I cannot see how this does not apply to the
multiple occurrence case. Of course I do not agree with this premise, for
reasons I have explained in detail previously.

P.S. I will tell you an amazing technique for saving those 100000 key
strokes. Type them in using +, and then use the amazing global replace
technology found in all editors for the last 30 years, and replace the
plus signs with what ever long name you want (well you will have to
fiddle with parens too, but this is also easy enough to automate :-)