5 ms·

I always forgot which was which until I actually forced me to use them for a while (and "while" was too long). The only cool thing of the names is that you can

I always forgot which was which until I actually forced me to use them for a while (and "while" was too long). The only cool thing of the names is that you can get a cryptic sticker "My other car is a cdr" that no-one will understand but will make you jiggle each morning

petercooper 13y ago
Mine is "car" and "CarDriveR" (implying first comes the car, then its driver). "CorriDoR" is another one which implies the extra length a bit better.
- RBerenguel 13y ago
  I just hard-wired into my brain they are car and cdr (I read it as "cadar," with both a's quite like the a in car, Spanish a for me.) In a cons list, you have the car (first) and then the cadar. Think it enough times and it sinks eventually.
  - philwelch 13y ago
    But "cadar" is also a thing: it's the car of the cdr of the car.
    - RBerenguel 13y ago
      I know, I'm no lisp beginner, but the pronunciation of cdr is almost like "cadar". I just "Spanishised" it.
- MichaelGG 13y ago
  What's wrong with an ordinal sort? car sorts before cdr.
  - petercooper 13y ago
    Good point!
phoboslab 13y ago
I feel the same way about many *nix commands. A while ago I thought it was neat to have TLAs[1] for everything, but now I just think it's bad "API" design. Why is it ls instead of list? chmod instead of permissions? grep instead of search? mv, cp, rm instead of move, copy, remove? Is it really so much work to type a few more characters to justify this? Programming langue APIs (or rather their libraries) have come a long way since the C days in that regard, but OS wise we're still stuck with these cryptic names. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-letter_acronym http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-letter_acronym
- Peaker 13y ago
  *nix commands are optimized for minimizing keystrokes, too. Would you like to type out 2-3x more characters per command?
  - phoboslab 13y ago
    Yes, I wouldn't mind. That's what I'm saying. Imho it's a false assumption that you have to "minimize keystrokes". Programming languages noticed this a while ago. The time I spent thinking "what was that command again?" is far greater than the time I would need to type a few more characters.
    - RBerenguel 13y ago
      As I answered about (so I'm repeating it again :D) minimising keystrokes can also minimise typos (or generate horribly harmful ones, too, agreed)
    - thaumasiotes 13y ago
      > The time I spent thinking "what was that command again?" is far greater than the time I would need to type a few more characters. For ls? rm? mv? I use ls many times per day. Lengthening the name would be a huge loss for absolutely no gain; the odds of my forgetting what it's called are precisely zero. The more you use something, the more gain you get from a short name; unix commands are a near-perfect example of where even cryptic names (which mv, cp, rm, and ls do not qualify as) are very desirable.

petercooper 13y ago

Mine is "car" and "CarDriveR" (implying first comes the car, then its driver). "CorriDoR" is another one which implies the extra length a bit better.

RBerenguel 13y ago
I just hard-wired into my brain they are car and cdr (I read it as "cadar," with both a's quite like the a in car, Spanish a for me.) In a cons list, you have the car (first) and then the cadar. Think it enough times and it sinks eventually.
- philwelch 13y ago
  But "cadar" is also a thing: it's the car of the cdr of the car.
  - RBerenguel 13y ago
    I know, I'm no lisp beginner, but the pronunciation of cdr is almost like "cadar". I just "Spanishised" it.
MichaelGG 13y ago
What's wrong with an ordinal sort? car sorts before cdr.
- petercooper 13y ago
  Good point!

phoboslab 13y ago

I feel the same way about many *nix commands. A while ago I thought it was neat to have TLAs[1] for everything, but now I just think it's bad "API" design. Why is it ls instead of list? chmod instead of permissions? grep instead of search? mv, cp, rm instead of move, copy, remove? Is it really so much work to type a few more characters to justify this? Programming langue APIs (or rather their libraries) have come a long way since the C days in that regard, but OS wise we're still stuck with these cryptic names. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-letter_acronym http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-letter_acronym

Peaker 13y ago
*nix commands are optimized for minimizing keystrokes, too. Would you like to type out 2-3x more characters per command?
- phoboslab 13y ago
  Yes, I wouldn't mind. That's what I'm saying. Imho it's a false assumption that you have to "minimize keystrokes". Programming languages noticed this a while ago. The time I spent thinking "what was that command again?" is far greater than the time I would need to type a few more characters.
  - RBerenguel 13y ago
    As I answered about (so I'm repeating it again :D) minimising keystrokes can also minimise typos (or generate horribly harmful ones, too, agreed)
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    > The time I spent thinking "what was that command again?" is far greater than the time I would need to type a few more characters. For ls? rm? mv? I use ls many times per day. Lengthening the name would be a huge loss for absolutely no gain; the odds of my forgetting what it's called are precisely zero. The more you use something, the more gain you get from a short name; unix commands are a near-perfect example of where even cryptic names (which mv, cp, rm, and ls do not qualify as) are very desirable.