[racket] `def' ?

Sorry for putting words in your mouth - on a second reading, you were quite
clear on that point.

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:49 PM, ozzloy-racket-users <
ozzloy+users_racket-lang_org at gmail.com> wrote:

> i didn't assert that word length has nothing to do with readability, just
> that word frequency has more impact on reading time than word length.
>
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Luke Vilnis <lvilnis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I can only speak for myself but I think it's a bit much to assert that
>> word length has nothing to do with readability. Heck, maybe that's even
>> true for you, but not for everyone. I have certainly felt it to be an
>> issue. If the "define" keyword was 50 letters long it would definitely have
>> an impact on my ability to read code - it seems to be an issue of degree,
>> not existence.
>>
>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:26 PM, ozzloy-racket-users <
>> ozzloy+users_racket-lang_org at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________
>>>  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/c630431f/attachment.html>