One of the reasons i find it so hard to use non-Rust languages is how ugly they typically are by comparison. "fn" instead of "function" is such a great example of saving key presses where they're most needed. And you get very used to seeing compact abbreviations. Idk if that's what you're talking about though.

[–] SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Yeah, the most beautiful code is where all variables are just letters of the alphabet.

[–] Sunrosa@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Keywords aren't variables

[–] SlurpingPus@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Ooh yeah, overall coding culture is definitely not affected by the preferred nomenclature for identifiers. The person who's habituated to fn over function will absolutely never name their functions in the vein of chkdsk. The two are completely disconnected in the brain of the programmer who read too much K&R in their childhood and was irretrievably traumatized by it for life.

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

I'd say it's much more influential the names of the identifiers of the standard library.

A language with function keyword that names it's stdlib functions strstr and strtok will inspire way worse naming than on that has fn keyword with stdlib functions str::contains and str::split.

We could search for a random crate on crates.io and see what identifiers people actually use, or we could spread misinformation on Lemmy.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (7 replies)

load more comments (112 replies)