On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Erling Hellenäs <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>> In most common programing languages today names of functions and
> variables are long.


This is one of the most valuable ways that J and other 'terse' languages
stand out from the crowd.


> The program and the environment is often complex. Long names are needed to
> describe complex operations in a complex environment.


I don't think operations are any more complex than they were decades ago.
In fact, I think operations have become more simple as we do more to
connect different libraries together.


> We choose to make the code self-documenting because we know we will have
> problems keeping any documentation up to date. We copy and paste, we can
> rename functions and variables in the whole program or the whole workspace,
> there is autocomplete. With these tools long names does not slow us down.


Long names take longer to read and to create. Naming things is one of the
harder problems I think.



> Short names would also cause problems with rename and refactoring.
> I don't mean we should remove the symbols for our operations. When you
> have some short complex operation you often can't describe it in words,
> there are no reasonable names for the variables, the notation is then the
> description you need. For these reasons you can also sometimes choose to
> have short function and variable names. These short snippets most often
> require comments and some up-to-date written documentation, as I see it.
>
>>
>>
I agree. I prefer clear notation and symbols over long names. It's easier
for me to follow a train of symbols (with practice) than it is to read a
sequence of long names and jump around lines to variable declarations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to