3 ms·
It's the sort of emotions over logic we need more, you mean.
by zanellato19 2y ago
It's the sort of emotions over logic we need more, you mean.
- userbinator 2y ago[flagged]
- dymk 2y ago[flagged]
- aziaziazi 2y agoI mostly agree, but not for code lexical choices. The comment obviously lacks empathy and would be better unsung another tone and not words like graveyard. Names are easier to learn and remember when universal. We know memorization works with associations and Chocolate, PaleTurquoise and Aqua are great for that. Chartreuse and DodgerBlue aren’t. While I can personnaly relate to the first the second is totally alien. Both lacks a bit more universality IMHO. Absolute universality isn’t achievable but I stand that is a usefull direction to head to. I’m deeply sorry for Eric’s daughter and gratefull for his work. I’m sure there’s other ways to honor them. PS: thanks for the HN post, now I can relate to RebeccaPurple!
- kibwen 2y agoNot even this. There's no "logical" argument against it. The CSS color names are largely arbitrary and always have been (e.g. "indigo" is a shade of purple, when IRL indigo is the plant that produces the dye for blue jeans). Color names in general have been arbitrary since long before Newton coined ROYGBIV and decided to use "blue" to mean what we call "cyan" today. It's an attitude that presumes that we can apply logic to all walks of life, which ironically is an inherently illogical stance.
- hombre_fatal 2y agoYeah, that's the main oversight of the OP that makes them look silly. There was no logic to the naming scheme. It was all arbitrary, and the names came in waves from various sources like house paint colors, Crayolas, and the whims of people behind various implementations. If they replaced '#663399' with 'rebeccapurple' maybe they'd have a point.