3 ms·
I would just argue for a happy median. Enough to convey intent, without being verbose. Your java example is clearly exhausingly verbose (I’ve seen similar in C#
by adamkl 9y ago
I would just argue for a happy median. Enough to convey intent, without being verbose. Your java example is clearly exhausingly verbose (I’ve seen similar in C#), where it seems in Go it would probably be written:
rd := 1000
How is anyone supposed to understand at a glance what this value is for? Why not just:
reconnectionDelay := 1000
Intent is clear.
And now, I have strayed way too far off topic (I’ve done some flamegraph style debugging in .Net, super useful!), and should probably apologize to the OP.
- crispinb 9y ago(to continue straying for a moment..) perhaps though it best depends on the variable specifics: like how often it appears, how far apart multiple uses are, etc. Some natural limits might be: (1) single letters for extremely local terms whose structural meaning is more salient than denotation (canonical example: loop counter); (2) fully spelled-out terms for globally-significant terms (not necessarily in global scope) whose denotation is crucial (canonical example: an app configuration value). Even two short camel-cased words often seem unnecessarily verbose for a loop counter to me. Whereas an important global config variable might justify the full THIS_IS_WHAT_I_AM_FOR treatment.