Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous

[foobar]

On Wednesday, 7 March 2012 at 21:39:39 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 03/07/2012 09:04 PM, foobar wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 7 March 2012 at 10:08:53 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>> On 03/06/2012 10:30 PM, deadalnix wrote:
>>>>
>>>> auto helps too.
>>>
>>> This remark was explicitly about _Java_ code style.
>>
>> Wrong. This is an issue with the *language*, NOT the naming 
>> convention.
>
> It is hard to imagine how it could be concluded that this is 
> not what the post has expressed.

Come on, do we really need to discuss the difference between a 
programming language and its coding conventions?
The fact that Java has flaws *as a language* is completely 
orthogonal to the fact that it has an excellent coding convention 
which can also be used with other languages such as D.

One of the reasons for Java's success is its code style despite 
being a simplistic language. It might be painful to write 
"duration" instead of "dur" when working on your own pet project 
but it's in a different story when dealing with large enterprise 
systems. IMO D will not catch on in a larger setting (in the 
enterprise) as long as it refuses to grow up and keeps it 
advocating its 1337 hacker attitude.