Backend nearly entirely converted to D

[welkam]

On Thursday, 8 November 2018 at 18:52:02 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> length is getting ridiculous

Having better editor support is nice but by "use better editor" 
you meant use vim dont you? And even if I switch to vim it wont 
solve my initial objection to one letter variable names. Its 
needless hurdles. Not to mention the next person new to this will 
likely have same problems like me. And the person after that etc. 
Which comes to my recurring thought when dealing with dmd. How 
the f@#k should I knew that? Documentation and instructions 
around D project is almost non existant. Does idea pit of success 
not apply to compiler?


Human brain is good at finding patterns. Its also good at finding 
patters it wants to find where they dont exist. Your statement 
that humans have no problems in disambiguating language is 
completely false. Most people just ignore logical conflicts or 
lack of information needed to correctly understand what is being 
said. Most people dont put lots of effort in understanding what 
exactly is being said and humans are bad at conveying their 
thoughts trough words to begin with. Extreme case of this is all 
forms of religious believes. Here is a clip where people give 
definitions of God and none of them are the same
https://youtu.be/HhRo9ABvef4
and here is one where J.P. at least tries to disambiguate words.
https://youtu.be/q0O8Jw6grro

When people talk about God first they cant tell precisely what 
they believe. Second they dont know precisely what others 
believe. And third it doesnt even matter as long as you make 
vaguely sounding sentences. Same extends to the rest of human 
interactions and humans would happily go without noticing that 
until they have to interact with computers where you have to 
define everything precisely.

Your second idea that shorter words have less information is... 
just... What? English is not floating point where length dictates 
precision. In German maybe with one word created from combining 
multiple but not in English.

Then you combined your both flawed ideas to produce paragraph 
where good and bad ideas are mixed together.

No I did not strawman. I took Walters advice from NWCPP talk 
precisely to show a flow in it. If variable name lenght should be 
related to scope then changing scope should change variable name 
lenght. You on the other hand changed advice to binary advice. 
Either local and short or global and verbose
NWCPP talk
https://youtu.be/lbp6vwdnE0k?t=444

Code is read more often than written and should be optimized for 
that. One letter variable names are not descriptive enough. In 
short functions you can get away from paying mental price but in 
long ones you do not.