[erlang-questions] Which choice is better? Function or Case
Sun Mar 10 16:33:41 CET 2013
On 3/10/13 4:27 AM, wrote:> I'm trying to think of
anything nastier for a programmer to
> do to another programmer than to know something the second
> programmer needs to know and deliberately choose to conceal
> it by using ultra-short variable names. If I have any luck
> I'll let you know.
> Seriously, the job of a programmer is to *COMMUNICATE* with
> other programmers. I wish I could offer a simple rule for
> how long to make variable names. My colleague who refuses
> to use "i" for a loop index in C++, preferring
> innerLoopIndex, clearly errs on one side. Someone who uses
> T for timestamp, tree, and table in the same module clearly
> errs on the other.
I agree with this, to a point. Few things irk me as much as
Ret = fish_bowl:boil(Bowl, timer:minutes(3)),
I've seen many high quality projects that do this, so I cannot criticize
the technique as some engineering downfall, but never once have I
encountered a variable of this sort that was not better served by a
descriptive name. In this case, perhaps `Boiled' is the correct name.
However, this has more to do with variable names that mean nothing in
context. There's no sense in proscribing short variable names without
Suppose a function that searches a list of `dict()`s which are expected
to simply store `term()`s for the user, where we cannot infer the type
or other nature of the value. In that function, I believe that variable
names such `K' and `V' are entirely suitable, just as `X' and `N' fit
comfortably in a mathematical function.
What I don't like is variable names like `X', `X1', `X2' in a function
that is not mathematical at all. Even if a program is full of nothing
but the simplest functions, their clauses must still be maintained by
somebody, and there's no sense in deliberately providing vague, short
variable names simply for the sake of narrower code or less typing.
Of course, there are exceptions to every rule ... "A foolish consistency
is the hobgoblin of little minds."
More information about the erlang-questions