3 ms·

Still, I think GP's comment is interesting. I do agree that type name and variable/argument name can be redundant in statically typed languages, such as c++ or

Still, I think GP's comment is interesting. I do agree that type name and variable/argument name can be redundant in statically typed languages, such as c++ or java. (I've never used Go) For example, int getAge(Person p); is clear enough, whereas int getAge(Person person) ; is redundant. Haskell does type inference, so even if types are static they are not explicit. That's why you still need explicit variable names.

masklinn 10y ago
> I do agree that type name and variable/argument name can be redundant in statically typed languages, such as c++ or java. Except neither exposes that pattern (they essentially have only one such variable in their top list, and it's "i"). And I already mentioned C# which is very similar to Java. > is redundant. I'm not saying single-letter variables (or no variable at all which is also possible in Haskell) is universally bad, I'm saying it is disturbing to find how absolutely ubiquitous it is in Go. Variable names are sometimes redundant, that is not a universal constant. That redundancy is a factor of the expressiveness of the type system, that's hardly a claim of fame of Go. > Haskell does type inference, so even if types are static they are not explicit. Go has local type inference, and leveraging Haskell's global type inference is usually recommended against. > That's why you still need explicit variable names. No, it is not.
msluyter 10y ago
I think that depends on the length getAge(). If it's 3 lines, 'p' probably is fine. If it's 200 -- which, perhaps it shouldn't be but that's another issue -- then person is probably a better choice because you may lose the original context as you scan the method. Also in Java if you use intellij then you'll probably get 'person' as an autocomplete, which actually makes it roughly as easy to type out as 'p', (and a better choice if your entire team has standardized on intellij.)

masklinn 10y ago

> I do agree that type name and variable/argument name can be redundant in statically typed languages, such as c++ or java. Except neither exposes that pattern (they essentially have only one such variable in their top list, and it's "i"). And I already mentioned C# which is very similar to Java. > is redundant. I'm not saying single-letter variables (or no variable at all which is also possible in Haskell) is universally bad, I'm saying it is disturbing to find how absolutely ubiquitous it is in Go. Variable names are sometimes redundant, that is not a universal constant. That redundancy is a factor of the expressiveness of the type system, that's hardly a claim of fame of Go. > Haskell does type inference, so even if types are static they are not explicit. Go has local type inference, and leveraging Haskell's global type inference is usually recommended against. > That's why you still need explicit variable names. No, it is not.

msluyter 10y ago

I think that depends on the length getAge(). If it's 3 lines, 'p' probably is fine. If it's 200 -- which, perhaps it shouldn't be but that's another issue -- then person is probably a better choice because you may lose the original context as you scan the method. Also in Java if you use intellij then you'll probably get 'person' as an autocomplete, which actually makes it roughly as easy to type out as 'p', (and a better choice if your entire team has standardized on intellij.)