Wrong answer. Names should be cute AND descriptive. His point is good though. Descriptive names add overhead that might need to be changed. Giving something

Wrong answer. Names should be cute AND descriptive. His point is good though. Descriptive names add overhead that might need to be changed. Giving something a cute name but describes its general purpose, means you have a lot of leeway, but if you get to the point where even the general name doesn’t work and you want to change it, then you actually have a new product and creation is better than evolution when it comes to software. Joey, the small service that hops from one place to the next in what seems like ~~ab~~an endless loop, is like a baby kangaroo, and it can even grow into a real kangaroo and do whatever they do, but it isn’t gonna become a fire breathing dragon, and if Joey is trying to be forced into being a dragon instead of a kangaroo, well maybe it’s time to start from the beginning and decide which programming language to use ~~snd~~and go from there. Think of it, instead of writing software, we just write fantasy stories, and the software that tells the story is our product. I don’t know about you but I could probably come up with some cool stories of Joey the baby kangaroo. I’m going to start a company and name all the services and APIs supporting the software after the best characters from mythology, and just start making good characters and then figure out where they go in the story. The story is already written, but the characters have to be fleshed out.