> I'd grant that there's two distinct audiences: one who's familiar with the codebase already and has to read these symbols but knows what they mean, and one wh

> I'd grant that there's two distinct audiences: one who's familiar with the codebase already and has to read these symbols but knows what they mean, and one who's new to the code. I think your point only works for the former and doesn't help the latter at all. With the exception of the "i" (possibly inverse?), the rest of the parts seem like things you would very quickly become familiar with after a short period of looking at the code and reading up on the subject matter (both of which would be required if you wanted to contribute or port). I guess having names that are immediately understandable to any fresh reader with zero domain knowledge is a noble goal, but it's a high bar. It's not a perfect function name (you've pointed out some other, valid, problems) but it's far from being objectively bad.