foobar wrote: > Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > >> On 2/11/11 7:07 AM, foobar wrote: >> > Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> I don't find the name "iota" stupid. >> >> >> >> Andrei >> > >> > Of course _you_ don't. However practically all the users _do_ find it >> > poorly named, including other developers in the project.. This is the >> > umpteenth time this comes up in the NG and incidentally this is the >> > only reason I know what the function does. >> > >> > If the users think the name is stupid than it really is. That's how >> > usability works and the fact the you think otherwise or that it might >> > be more accurate mathematically is really not relevant. If you want >> > D/Phobos to be used by other people besides yourself you need to >> > cater for their requirements. >> >> Not all users dislike iota, and besides arguments ad populum are >> fallacious. Iota rocks. But have at it - vote away, and I'll be glad if >> a better name for iota comes about. >> >> Andrei > > Usability seems to be Achilles' heel of D and is a recurrent theme on the > NG. Usability cannot be mathematically deduced even though you seem to try > hard to do just that. This reminds me the story of a Google designer that > quit the company, being frustrated by the engineering mind-set of the > company. He gave many amusing examples of a complete lack of understanding > of design principals such as choosing the shade of blue by doing a > "scientific" comparison of a thousand different shades. > > could we for once put aside otherwise valid implementation concerns such > as efficiency and mathematical correctness and treat usability as valid > important concern? Could we for once accept that The users' opinion is not > "fallacious" and have a user oriented design is not a bad thing or are we > implementing for the sake of boosting ones own ego and nothing else?
first rule of usability: don't listen to users http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010805.html