I feel compelled to point out that there is no such thing as "British
English". There is English, the written language with all its archaic
spellings and there are many spoken dialects, the most formal of which
is RP (Received Pronunciation) sometimes called The Queen's English
(even though she is German).
If we went to the effort of re-spelling words to match how they were
spoken, then we would just end up with multiple accepted spellings (and
some new letters), or a nation of 1920s radio newscasters, neither of
which appeals to me. As it is, the archaic spellings help to make words
more visually distinct, after all, we have some words that are spoken
the same but spelled differently (and vice versa >< ).
As for identifiers and abbreviations, as long as they are sufficiently
visually distinct, I'd be happy. I tolerate USian spellings as much as
non-English speaking programmers do, because I see it as an accepted
"Programmer's English".
Secondly, D has its "the obvious solution is the right solution"
philosophy. so the "right" identifiers should also be the obvious ones,
but they should also be short especially when used frequently. Longer
identifiers should be used sparingly, but are useful to convey
subtleties such as different side effects and of course, to make
non-safe code stand out.
A...
- Re: Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculou... Alix Pexton
-
