Live data from Hacker News

Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

lr0.org

291–300 of 563 posts

Re: Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

#291
post #187

GNU's version of Yacc is called Bison. Pine Is Not Elm (even though that was never an official acronym). UNIX was UNICS which was a pun on MULTICS. I couldn't for the life of me tell you what dd stands for. nano is a copy of pico which was the "PIne COmposer". Postfix is a completely opaque portmanteau of post (as in mail) and "bug fix". C++ is "C incremented", and C is the successor of B, which is the successor of B…

Even GNU is a recursive acronym, Emacs a convoluted one... What's Perl, Python, Java... all about? Remember how JavaScript was named? Don't mention Go (go-lang) or Pascal... Git, Mercurial, CVS anyone? I believe this makes much ado about nothing.

"Concurrent Versions/Versioning System" is a pretty reasonable one, though.

Re: Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

#292
post #187

GNU's version of Yacc is called Bison. Pine Is Not Elm (even though that was never an official acronym). UNIX was UNICS which was a pun on MULTICS. I couldn't for the life of me tell you what dd stands for. nano is a copy of pico which was the "PIne COmposer". Postfix is a completely opaque portmanteau of post (as in mail) and "bug fix". C++ is "C incremented", and C is the successor of B, which is the successor of B…

Pretty sure dd is disk destroyer

Re: Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

#293
post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people are passionate about being professional in the sense of doing things competently and expertly. Cuteness is inherently a mental distraction from what you really care about in the craft, which is why it appears tonally inappropriate. The desire to add some sort of cuteness is taken as an indication that the person apparently doesn’t derive enough joy from the workmanship itself. In other words, a lack of ca…

But that's trivially provable to not be true. You can easily be both: dedicated and professional in your work, and fun and flimsy where possible. I mean, all the funny names of great software in this thread and even OP are a testament to that.

And it’s a lowkey flex. Look, I can be technical wiz and have a sense of humor at the same time!

Re: Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

#294
"...When you see “libsodium,” you must context-switch from problem-solving mode to detective mode: “What does this do? Let me check the README. Ah, it’s a crypto library... "

I would not mind the command names whose etymology was complex or inspired, if the README files would do a better job of giving context and function. Even though I have a wide set of wheelhouses in computer systems, I frequently encounter README files that still leaves me saying "Huh?". I shouldn't have to google three levels down before I get a clue.

Re: Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

#295

> grep (global regular expression print), awk (Aho, Weinberger, Kernighan; the creators’ initials), sed (stream editor), cat (concatenate), diff (difference). Even when abbreviated, these names were either functional descriptions or systematic derivations. If you asked someone unfamiliar with unix tools what they thought each of these commands did, diff is the only one which they would have even the slightest chance…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libiberty was always my favorite ridiculous name. It was named so you can link it with -liberty.

A friend created a library called library which was kind of a converse to that (you had to link it with -lrary). It was funny for 30 seconds and then just annoying.

Re: Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

#296
post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure I like awk, sed, or cat, I think these are just names we’re used to, not good really. diff seems ok. grep almost has an onomatopoeic nature to it… like, it sounds like you are grabbing or ripping the patterns out of the file, right?

They're good names because they're short and easily recognizable

There are only so many short names to go around.

Re: Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

#297
post #187

GNU's version of Yacc is called Bison. Pine Is Not Elm (even though that was never an official acronym). UNIX was UNICS which was a pun on MULTICS. I couldn't for the life of me tell you what dd stands for. nano is a copy of pico which was the "PIne COmposer". Postfix is a completely opaque portmanteau of post (as in mail) and "bug fix". C++ is "C incremented", and C is the successor of B, which is the successor of B…

The only thing that's different between the era when Bison as named and now is the proliferation. There is vastly more shit in open source with the cute names. Back then, one person could keep all the cute names for everything related to C and Unix in their head.

Re: Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

#298

> grep (global regular expression print), awk (Aho, Weinberger, Kernighan; the creators’ initials), sed (stream editor), cat (concatenate), diff (difference). Even when abbreviated, these names were either functional descriptions or systematic derivations. If you asked someone unfamiliar with unix tools what they thought each of these commands did, diff is the only one which they would have even the slightest chance…

cat is arguably from catenate, which is the smarter, shorter version of concatenate. By default, unadorned catenation is a joining (literally "making into a chain"), which is always together/with, so the con prefix is redundant. If you ever need a derivative of catenate that means splitting apart, you can coin discatenate, where the dis then plays an essential role.

Also, why is it that people are gregarious when they congregate, and not congregarious? Or why didn't they just gregate? There was such a Latin cognate verb without the con attached.

Re: Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

#299

> This would be career suicide in virtually any other technical field. This article would certainly disagree with you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._Department_of_Def... > the Golden Gate Bridge tells you it spans the Golden Gate strait. Is that even a meaningful distinction? Does anyone think, "Gee, I'd really like to cross the Golden Gate strait?" or do they think "I want to get to Napa?". > The Hoover…

> > No chemist wakes up and decides to call it “Steve” because Steve is a funny name and they think it’ll make their paper more approachable. The author is just wrong. Chemistry is fairly jam-packed with various cutesy names either to amuse the authors or because they’re attempting to make an algorithm memorable to the field. Off the top of my head: - SHAKE and RATTLE: Bond constraint algorithms. - CHARMm: An MD pack…

Physics has "Strangeness" and "Charm Quarks"

My own field Materials Engineering has:

"Hardness", "Toughness", Resilience", etc. which all describe different properties.

"Ferromagnetic" or "Ferrimagnetic best believe those are different.

Re: Programmers and software developers lost the plot on naming their tools

#300
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > No chemist wakes up and decides to call it “Steve” because Steve is a funny name and they think it’ll make their paper more approachable. The author is just wrong. Chemistry is fairly jam-packed with various cutesy names either to amuse the authors or because they’re attempting to make an algorithm memorable to the field. Off the top of my head: - SHAKE and RATTLE: Bond constraint algorithms. - CHARMm: An MD pack…

Most of your examples are software! Also SHAKE and RATTLE describe the motion-simulation in the algorithm. Acronyms are abbreviations for meaningful names.

> Most of your examples are software!

Most of my examples are from computational chemistry, which is software, but (historically) written by chemists.

As one of those chemists (at least before my current work), I feel somewhat qualified to comment on my field and whether it always names things seriously or not.

But if you look around, fun terms are everywhere in chemistry or chemistry-adjacent fields. For example, PALM and STORM (from fluorescence microscopy) were almost certainly chosen because they were easy to remember.

> Also SHAKE and RATTLE describe the motion-simulation in the algorithm.

Not really. SHAKE and RATTLE are bond constraint algorithms to avoid simulating the fast degrees of freedom, typically in solvent.

In molecular dynamics, your time step is effectively set by the fastest degree of freedom (there’s a relationship with the Nyquist theorem here), so it pays to freeze out the vibrations of the O-H bonds in water when you’re simulating a larger system. SHAKE and RATTLE effectively freeze the bond and angle distances near equilibrium while allowing some relaxation.

The rest of the degrees of freedom are typically integrated with a larger time step using a method appropriate for the simulation ensemble (eg: one of the Verlet integrators, a Langevin integrator, etc).

> Acronyms are abbreviations for meaningful names.

Acronyms like XPS, EPR, NMR, etc are like that: dry, short, and meaningful.

But there are a lot that were chosen because they were entertaining to the authors or because they are easy to remember. Even in a technical field, marketing matters.

Post reply on HN