Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous

[H. S. Teoh]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 01:38:08PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator at gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:sgmfyzmrfygshlmfqsdj at forum.dlang.org...
[[...]
> > But, either option is better than "Clr" or "Col".
> 
> "clr" is the verb "clear" and "col" is "column" :)
[...]

clr == common language runtime
col == polysemous word meaning anything from column to color to collect to colon.

;-)

Jokes aside, though I'm not suggesting we actually do this, I frankly
find Col an acceptable abbreviation for *both* "Color" and "Column",
because context usually makes it clear which one is meant. The human
brain is highly capable of inferring intention from context (which is
why function overloading is even remotely workable in the first place).
Witness, for example, the variety of meanings the word 'set' may have
depending on context. It's a horribly overloaded, overused, and
ambiguous word, objectively speaking. But we also use it every day
without even thinking twice, even in programming (e.g., set a variable
vs. a set of objects vs. an object of type Set vs. language rules set in
stone).


T

-- 
Truth, Sir, is a cow which will give [skeptics] no more milk, and so
they are gone to milk the bull. -- Sam. Johnson