On Friday, March 09, 2012 09:39:23 deadalnix wrote: > Le 07/03/2012 04:46, Nick Sabalausky a écrit : > > "Adam D. Ruppe"<destructiona...@gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:bwqkuqhyiygvgqswi...@forum.dlang.org... > > > >> On Wednesday, 7 March 2012 at 03:24:23 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > >>> I don't understand this complaint at all. curr is an incredibly common > >>> abbreviation for current. > >> > >> Is it your *first* choice? > > > > In the general case, it frequently is for me. In the specific case of > > Clock.curr(ent)?Time, I'm equally happy either way. Although I agree with > > whoever it was (Brad?) that said "Clock.now()" would be even better. > > The usage of current is often a smell that is saying « I had no clue how > to name that, so I did name it using current ». > > Meaningful name are what we should look for. And now is meaningful.
It's no more meaniful than currTime. It's just another name for the same thing. - Jonathan M Davis
