[racket] `def' ?

am i the only one that thinks not having abbreviated names for anything is
good?
i like not having "def".  especially if it's going to be redundant.
i see this as a slippery slope i don't want to go down.
it annoys me when switching to other languages to have to ask: which way of
shortening "function" does this language go with?  was it "fn"? maybe "fun"?
if the language has a strict policy of not using short versions of words, i
don't have to guess.

as for "def" being easier to read than "define", that's not true.  word
frequency has more impact on reading time than word length for normal
reading.  having more aliases makes both less frequent, so adding "def"
could plausibly make reading both take longer.  most people read whole
words at a time, rather than letter-by-letter.

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Grant Rettke <grettke at acm.org> wrote:

> There is always pretty mode in Emacs.
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Ray Racine <ray.racine at gmail.com> wrote:
> > FYI for those who may not know.  Racket supports λ as an alias for
> lambda.
> >  ctrl-\ in DrRacket.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Nikita B. Zuev <nikitazu at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 for `def' as alias for `define'.
> >> May I also suggest `fun' for `lambda' alias?
> >> Three letter names are the best =)
> >>
> >> (well one can always do it with require rename-in)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >> Nikita B. Zuev
> >> ____________________
> >>  Racket Users list:
> >>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________
> >  Racket Users list:
> >  http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.wisdomandwonder.com/
> ACM, AMA, COG, IEEE
>
> ____________________
>  Racket Users list:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20120510/95394dce/attachment.html>