this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2026
33 points (70.9% liked)

Technology

86866 readers
3621 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] luthis@lemmy.nz 44 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Hard disagree. Is that a joke? Type is far More important than name. Just ask the compiler.

[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

As other users have said, we aren't compilers.

Types are important for type safety, so you don't access properties that don't exist, can use polymorphism etc. However, having worked in both duck-typing and hard typing languages, I believe the most important part of a type is it's name.

Classes are are arbitrary constructs we create to help us understand and manage code. They are inherently organisational structures.

That may sound like an argument FOR putting the name of the class first. "If I know it's a ConnectionCredentialsQuery, I don't need to know it's name, the use-case is evident!" Classes often get reused though, like a CartesianPoint. You may create several instances of them. Which of the name and type below are more indicative of use?

CartesianPoint PlayerPosition; 

Types are, to some extent, implementation detail. The name tells you what the variable is for, which is more important.

Another point: You will always need to name variables well, because after declaration, whenever you see a variable, you will only see its name. You want to be able to fully understand what you are looking at without having to mouse over or go back to the declaration of a variable.

Additionally, many typed languages will allow you to use a syntax to altogether avoid declaring the type of a variable if derived from somewhere else.

var result = a + b;

var customer = new Customer();

Given that the type can be inferred, and therefore specifying it explicitly is optional, why make it the first thing you see? That means you need to move your eye back and forth when looking for the names of things. Which of these two are better for legibility:

var result = a + b;
CartesianCoordinate playerPosition;
const result = a + b;
let playerPosition: CartesianCoordinate; 

Finally, you say that types are more important because they are important to the compiler, but compilers don't care about the order of these definitions. Compilers exist to allow us to write easier to read code. They exist to convert high level languages to low level byte code. They exist to enable more readable code.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Counter argument - putting the type first makes it easier to see where it is declared. Which is more important than the name or the type

[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If you're looking for declarations, some languages use const, let or var followed by the name of said variable. That's a little easier to find than having a type name at the start, so I don't think what you're saying gives the other approach an advantage. The indentation is also more consistent with these keywords, which helps.

I realise some languages (like Python) don't use these sorts of keywords during declaration. For those languages it could indeed be a disadvantage.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 3 points 1 week ago

What you're saying is more consistent, but I don't think it's more readable

I'm fine with let or var...if the compiler is going to infer the type thats all well and good. But it's a replacement for the type - why would you write both? It should be either or

And if the type is being inferred, the next thing I want to know is where it came from. That tells you the type and more, I don't want to have to see a type name that may or may not be there

[–] gnutrino@programming.dev 14 points 1 week ago (9 children)

Controversial take: it doesn't matter in the slightest.

[–] stardreamer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Breaking News: local dev argues peanut butter on jam is the same as jam on peanut butter.

[–] MolochHorridus@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Try to write some code and see if it matters. Try to argue against a compiler, please.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Maybe this comes from a non-typed language perspective... As someone who learned in Java, I do not like it because yeah, type is way more important. If someone was coming from Python, I can see why they might think this...

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

I learned Java first. I think type should come second as well, like in TypeScript et al.

If you're ever looking for the variable manually for some reason, by searching with your eyes, it's easier to find it by searching in the first character column.

Otherwise, if you ever need to see the type of something, which... should be obvious from the context in quality code, your LSP should just be able to tell you directly, by some mechanism (hover with mouse, or some keyboard action).

[–] faintwhenfree@lemmus.org 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I learned C++ first, have been using python for the last decade almost daily for various one off tasks. I like python, but if I had to build something that will be used even hundred of thousand times, I wouldn't do it in python.

Anyway point being, despite me using for decades, I still yearn for C++.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I tried to use C++ in 1991 but the Borland Turbo C++ compiler was too buggy, so we used C instead. By 1996 C++ was "ready for primetime" on IBM-compatible PCs (yes, they still called them that, sometimes in 1996) and I switched - for 30 years.

I just spent 10 days building a proof of concept in Python, all the "common wisdom" says that was the fast way to get it done. Now that the prototype is done and the (initial) user feedback is addressed, I'm running a port to something better for lightweight, performant, easy deployment... sadly, C++ isn't even on the radar for potential targets - top 3 candidates were Go, Rust and C#. I can't abide the C# ecosystem, and Rust is just a little too rigid and immature for my tastes, so here we Go... anticipated to take 50% longer to port from Python than the Python took to develop in the first place... we shall see...

[–] elephantium@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (7 children)

I can’t abide the C# ecosystem,

Why not? I like working in C#, so I'm curious what about the ecosystem bothers you.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] it_depends_man@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I only use python and I don't understand why someone might think that. The order in python's type hints is wrong too.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago

Script languages are quick and dirty (but slow), I hate it when they try to shoehorn every high level concept into them.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] luthis@lemmy.nz 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Maybe, but i speak English that follows adjective - noun pattern. So I'm already conditioned to type - name

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My language does that, as well as English in which I am fluent. I still find type-first to be impractical.

Also when you write the code, you are usually looking to create a variable, so maybe you type "var" or "const", right, then you have a contextual name in mind, maybe salary. Then you can make a decision, which type it should be. Maybe "whole dollars"? "Dollars in a decimal number"? Or it could be a complex type in other contexts.

That's how I prefer to write code. 👍

Maybe it makes more sense to someone who knows more than one language as well, e.g. languages that use a noun-adjective structure, like French, or Farsi. I don't know. But for me it's not about language, it's about practicality. Findability and writability, if those can be considered words, lol.

[–] Takapapatapaka@tarte.nuage-libre.fr 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My main language is french, and yet i prefer the type-name order. Maybe its because i first learned C, but i guess its also because it goes from general to particular, whereas name-type feels like going backward (being detailed with name, then vague with type, then more detailed with value assignment). Anyway, i guess you're right, it's probably not a lot about language.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] chrash0@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

a lot of modern languages explicitly disagree, eg Kotlin and Rust

[–] andallthat@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think that's so type inference can work by just omitting the type, instead of having to use "var" or "auto" in front of the variable name

[–] chrash0@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

not precisely. Rust has let mut and Kotlin has val; ie the member layout and the mutability are treated differently, since those languages have mutability rules.

this is a circular argument anyway. the language designers could have figured out a way to do type inference like, eg, Java, but, again, explicitly chose not to.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Yoddel_Hickory@piefed.ca 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Type is more important? So if the first argument of a function is minAge, which is an int, the important part is that it is an int? Just feed it any int?

No, the important part is the meaning, what the variable actually is, if you use a compiled language the compiler will handle types for you anyway. You'll get a error if you feed it a string, or an water heater object, no surprises.

Leave the machine work to the machine (compiler in this case), and concentrate on the real work, which is the meaning here.

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

sorry, I'm not a compiler, so no

[–] graynk@discuss.tchncs.de 34 points 1 week ago (3 children)

This doesn't matter so so much that I don't even have the words for it

[–] sik0fewl@piefed.ca 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)
[–] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

bikeshedding: Futile expenditure of time and energy in discussion of marginal technical issues.

Not a term I was aware of. Thanks!

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago

There was a pub in my town called the Bike Shed. I spent many happy hours there in futile discussions of marginal technical issues.

Alas, they're now gone, I no longer drink alcohol, and the people I bikeshedded with have either died or moved away. I still occasionally shave a yak at work, though. Sometimes doing so is a necessary evil.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

It's only bike shedding if the people arguing over it don't know enough about the topic to actually make cohesive arguments.

Things like how we name things and the grammar we use are quite important in cognitive psychology. And we can take advantage of research into cognitive psychology to better improve how we write software.

[–] graynk@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 week ago

I can never remember which one's bikeshedding and which one is yak shaving... but yeah!

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 8 points 1 week ago

The choice doesn't matter - consistency does a bit.

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 week ago

It does kiiiiinnnnda matter, but I just don't care and it doesn't affect me. Problem solving and remaining mentally flexible and able to switch gears is just kind of part of the field. But yeah, it feels like the "tabs or spaces" thing, in that, I have a preference, but I'm so used to encountering way, way dumber and worse bs that I don't even care about tabs v spaces.

[–] it_depends_man@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (4 children)

This suggestion was made by the year-day-month dateformat gang.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That's year-month-day hour:minute:second.millisecond +/-TZ, you heathen!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Pissmidget@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Was about to write a post asking what the beverage dispenser in the authors workspace provided.

Then my brain snapped out of vacation mode and remembered that I mainly use var (mainly C# backend dev) which is effectively the same, and I've never had an issue with it.

Now I'm left torn and confused, and in work mode on vacation... What a day, and it's not even 08:30.

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

name before type makes it easier for compiler writers. Not the language users imo.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] palordrolap@fedia.io 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

This is just arguing about whether the surname goes before or after the given name.

If you think int x makes the most sense, you might be Chinese. Or Hungarian. Or English speaking if you grew up with characters like Fireman Sam or Postman Pat... erm...

[–] mercano@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

If you think of int as an adjective, the whole situation changes. It makes sense to an English speaker, but is backwards to a Spanish speaker.

This is my take as well. I will add that I think I'm more likely to notice an issue with the type if the type is first though since it preps me to expect a certain thing after it.

int firstName will likely trigger more alarms than firstName int but maybe thats just my perception due to familiarity. I feel like once I see the type my mind is looking to make the next part make sense whereas if I see the name first then I just assume what comes next makes sense and mentally move on.

[–] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] stoicmaverick@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

People who don't give ass rats?... You have to give one or the other, dude.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

By the popularity of type inference in variable declarations, a feature that’s included in most languages now: var in C# and Java, := in Go, auto in C++, and so on.

I don't really like type inference, because I think that it makes it more-obnoxious to read code. That being said, I will concede that if you want a lot of static type information


and compilers can do things with more information


it does make for more concise code.

EDIT: Hmm. I was trying to think what would make it better. Maybe I'd be more okay with it if all compilers for languages that did this had a trivial way to just run the type inference step and output code with inferred types present.

[–] mercano@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Number one thing that screws me up when moving between the TypeScript client-side code and the Java server-side code: how variables are declared. Java is type first, TypeScript is name first.

load more comments
view more: next ›