[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: command naming suggestions
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: command naming suggestions |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:55:11 +0900 |
Zenaan Harkness <address@hidden> writes:
> * I suggest to have an alias for every command that has one or more
> dashes ("-") in it, without the dashes.
I think this is a bad idea. Anybody who's ever had the misfortune of
reading BSD kernel code will know how completely unreadable names
without separators are (hint: _worse_ than studly-caps!); and such
"abbreviated" names _will_ find their way into scripts, tutorials, etc.
If you have problems typing dashes, that's an impediment to using
unix/lisp/etc in general. I'd respectfully suggest that it would be
more productive to simply get more practice typing dashes.
> * I suggest aliases for each of the library-* commands, obviously
> without the dashes, but also by shortening library to "lib", eg liblog,
> libfile, etc. "lib" is an easy and significantly less finger-twisting
> set of letters to type than "library" (I'm a touch typist, and library
> has always been "one of those words that slows you down").
I do find myself annoyed at two long strings in the command names, in
particular: "library" and "changeset". "lib" and "cset" might be good
abbreviations -- but such command names should use "-" separators, just
like the long command names.
Or, perhaps the official names should simply be made shorter (with
backward compatibility aliases).
-Miles
--
o The existentialist, not having a pillow, goes everywhere with the book by
Sullivan, _I am going to spit on your graves_.