4 ms·

I completely agree and I was a little surprised this blog post suggested that a simple 'c' was good enough. It's not good enough. While I understand the scope b

I completely agree and I was a little surprised this blog post suggested that a simple 'c' was good enough. It's not good enough. While I understand the scope between two functions is different, if the variables can be unique then I say make them unique! It makes scanning, grepping, etc all so much easier. Unless it's a very obvious index for a for loop I am against single letter variable names. Hell even if it's a for loop, if the code is so long within the loop that I have to scroll then I think the variable names need to be more obvious to keep the context with it as you scroll away from the declaration of the for loop.

Nullabillity 10y ago
> It makes scanning, grepping, etc all so much easier. Or you could use a decent editor, that keeps track of variable scopes.
- BinaryIdiot 10y ago
  > Or you could use a decent editor, that keeps track of variable scopes. Are you suggesting doing a find / grep inside the context of a current scope? Or just color codes / indents / marks in some way the scope? That works to a degree if an editor can do that though that still doesn't ultimately help the fact that it's a single file that you may need to search around for something. Plus not every environment will have your favorite editor setup how you like it.
  - Nullabillity 10y ago
    > Are you suggesting doing a find / grep inside the context of a current scope? Or just color codes / indents / marks in some way the scope? That works to a degree if an editor can do that though that still doesn't ultimately help the fact that it's a single file that you may need to search around for something. At least IntelliJ will highlight all uses of the currently selected variable/method/whatever, and will quickly allow you to jump to any of them. If I'm searching for something by name then it's almost always because it's in use somewhere, and a ctrl+click will take me there instantly, without getting bogged down in false positives. > Plus not every environment will have your favorite editor setup how you like it. Sure, but how often do you actually have to work with your regular codebase in such an environment? Sure, such a rule has its uses, but in 97% of cases it's just a symptom of a poor editor setup.

Nullabillity 10y ago

> It makes scanning, grepping, etc all so much easier. Or you could use a decent editor, that keeps track of variable scopes.

BinaryIdiot 10y ago
> Or you could use a decent editor, that keeps track of variable scopes. Are you suggesting doing a find / grep inside the context of a current scope? Or just color codes / indents / marks in some way the scope? That works to a degree if an editor can do that though that still doesn't ultimately help the fact that it's a single file that you may need to search around for something. Plus not every environment will have your favorite editor setup how you like it.
- Nullabillity 10y ago
  > Are you suggesting doing a find / grep inside the context of a current scope? Or just color codes / indents / marks in some way the scope? That works to a degree if an editor can do that though that still doesn't ultimately help the fact that it's a single file that you may need to search around for something. At least IntelliJ will highlight all uses of the currently selected variable/method/whatever, and will quickly allow you to jump to any of them. If I'm searching for something by name then it's almost always because it's in use somewhere, and a ctrl+click will take me there instantly, without getting bogged down in false positives. > Plus not every environment will have your favorite editor setup how you like it. Sure, but how often do you actually have to work with your regular codebase in such an environment? Sure, such a rule has its uses, but in 97% of cases it's just a symptom of a poor editor setup.