Targeting C

[Yigal Chripun]

On 23/10/2009 19:49, Pelle Månsson wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>> Yigal Chripun:
>>
>>> Hell no. This is why I hate certain programming languages.
>>> if you are trying to obfuscate the language than why not just define:
>>> rtqfrdsg and fdkjtkf as the function names?
>>
>> Don't be silly. In my dlibs "xsomething" are the lazy functions, and
>> "something" are the strict ones. That's not obfuscated, you need
>> seconds to learn a single easy rule.
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
> I think the complaint was not as much about the x as the iota.
> Seriously, iota?
>
> However, I like the array(range(0,10)) where range is always lazy, and
> array forces eagerness, better than separate xrange and range functions.

first thing xsomthing *is* silly and I agree with andrei and pelle about 
having an array function that forces eagerness.

but more generally speaking, each individual part can be rationalized 
like xsomething is lazy, iota generates a lazy range, etc.. but combined 
you get meaningless letters.. xaiota?

rule 1 of programming - code is read 1000 times more then written.
today at the age of terabyte HDDs writing strcmp instead of 
string_compare or stringCompare (depends on your love for camels) is 
absolutely ridiculous.