3 ms·
why would a verbose name (like stringByReplacingOccurrencesOfString:withString:) not be better than something short but completely meaningless and obscure like
by dinkblam 3y ago
why would a verbose name (like stringByReplacingOccurrencesOfString:withString:) not be better than something short but completely meaningless and obscure like /strtol/? we have autocompletion these days...
- happytoexplain 3y agoWhy are you making such a large jump? The Swift version is 'replacingOccurrences(of:with:)', where all three types are strings. Regardless, verbosity's cost is heavier while reading than writing (as you say, due to autocomplete).
- dinkblam 3y ago> Regardless, verbosity's cost is heavier while reading than writing (as you say, due to autocomplete). can you elaborate? the verbosity is good while reading, because you know what it does even if you don't know the API in your sleep. how could there be a verbosity cost while reading?
- catoc 3y agoVerbosity is in-place documentation. I personally like it. I have personal projects where, as the original creator and maintainer of the codebase, I should easily be able to understand what happens. But time and time again I find my current self being grateful to my former self for 'documenting' methods calls and variables by being verbose. [edit: removed typo]
- tambourine_man 3y agoI like terseness while reading as well. I get angry and bored with verbosity.