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.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Luke Vilnis <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lvilnis@gmail.com" target="_blank">lvilnis@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">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.<br> <br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:26 PM, ozzloy-racket-users <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ozzloy+users_racket-lang_org@gmail.com" target="_blank">ozzloy+users_racket-lang_org@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br> </div><div><div class="h5"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">am i the only one that thinks not having abbreviated names for anything is good?<div>i like not having "def". especially if it's going to be redundant.</div> <div>i see this as a slippery slope i don't want to go down.</div> <div>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"?</div><div>if the language has a strict policy of not using short versions of words, i don't have to guess.</div> <div><br></div><div>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.<div> <div><br> <div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Grant Rettke <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:grettke@acm.org" target="_blank">grettke@acm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> There is always pretty mode in Emacs.<br> <div><div><br> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Ray Racine <<a href="mailto:ray.racine@gmail.com" target="_blank">ray.racine@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br> > FYI for those who may not know. Racket supports λ as an alias for lambda.<br> > ctrl-\ in DrRacket.<br> ><br> ><br> > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Nikita B. Zuev <<a href="mailto:nikitazu@gmail.com" target="_blank">nikitazu@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br> >><br> >> +1 for `def' as alias for `define'.<br> >> May I also suggest `fun' for `lambda' alias?<br> >> Three letter names are the best =)<br> >><br> >> (well one can always do it with require rename-in)<br> >><br> >> --<br> >> Regards,<br> >> Nikita B. Zuev<br> >> ____________________<br> >> Racket Users list:<br> >> <a href="http://lists.racket-lang.org/users" target="_blank">http://lists.racket-lang.org/users</a><br> ><br> ><br> ><br> > ____________________<br> > Racket Users list:<br> > <a href="http://lists.racket-lang.org/users" target="_blank">http://lists.racket-lang.org/users</a><br> ><br> <br> <br> <br> </div></div><span><font color="#888888">--<br> <a href="http://www.wisdomandwonder.com/" target="_blank">http://www.wisdomandwonder.com/</a><br> ACM, AMA, COG, IEEE<br> </font></span><div><div><br> ____________________<br> Racket Users list:<br> <a href="http://lists.racket-lang.org/users" target="_blank">http://lists.racket-lang.org/users</a><br> </div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div> <br>____________________<br> Racket Users list:<br> <a href="http://lists.racket-lang.org/users" target="_blank">http://lists.racket-lang.org/users</a><br> <br></blockquote></div></div></div><br> </blockquote></div><br>