31–40 of 339 posts
Judging descriptive names by their worst examples is not exactly a charitable interpretation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a counter example, there are plenty of successful projects/brands with highly descriptive names: TypeScript, RHEL, GitHub, AWS, GraphQL, HAproxy, Sendmail, QuickBooks, …
What is descriptive about "RHEL" or "AWS"?
Aesthetically, at this point descriptive names almost look unprofessional, or at least quickly made. If you call your thing "ui-state-syncer" I'm going to suspect it's not really a big budget mainstream thing. If it's called Vue, I'm going to think it's big enough that someone thought it was worth it to spend an hour thinking of names. It was intended to get big. This isn't some minimal internal thing for one specifi…
As a counter example, there are plenty of successful projects/brands with highly descriptive names: TypeScript, RHEL, GitHub, AWS, GraphQL, HAproxy, Sendmail, QuickBooks, …
I'm assuming this is a tool for quickly laying out and publishing books. Or perhaps a tool for quickly searching for and downloading books to my iPad or ebook reader.
Aesthetically, at this point descriptive names almost look unprofessional, or at least quickly made. If you call your thing "ui-state-syncer" I'm going to suspect it's not really a big budget mainstream thing. If it's called Vue, I'm going to think it's big enough that someone thought it was worth it to spend an hour thinking of names. It was intended to get big. This isn't some minimal internal thing for one specifi…
Seems that names for projects follow the same rule as troll names in the japanese light novel Overlord. Short names, like "Gru" were reserved for the most powerful trolls because there were only so many combinations of three letters. Long names on the other hand were a sign of weakness and cowardice - bringing ridicule to those who introduced themselves like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a counter example, there are plenty of successful projects/brands with highly descriptive names: TypeScript, RHEL, GitHub, AWS, GraphQL, HAproxy, Sendmail, QuickBooks, …
What is descriptive about "RHEL" or "AWS"?
I mean it could’ve been “RedHat Cthulu” and “Amazon RainBox”.
Choosing whimsical names is a pretty good way to satisfy my two most important requirements. They are often unique and don't mislead people.
Of course my ideal name would also give some hint about what it does (I think Google's BigTable may be one of the best named products) but I think this is far less important than the other two requirements.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a counter example, there are plenty of successful projects/brands with highly descriptive names: TypeScript, RHEL, GitHub, AWS, GraphQL, HAproxy, Sendmail, QuickBooks, …
QuickBooks I'm assuming this is a tool for quickly laying out and publishing books. Or perhaps a tool for quickly searching for and downloading books to my iPad or ebook reader.
This is terrible advice. Cryptic names are horrible. It's a layer of cognitive overhead that no one needs. Yes if it gets so big that it's out grown it's original purpose that's a problem. But if it's really big people know what it is because it's big. If it's not that big rename it!
I opt to compromise and use middle ground name, which both related and fun. A tool for sending mails via Mailgun? “Railgun” then, for example.
Banana Cache
Hadouken Security Service
Lightfoot Containers
I mean, this is pretty much the AWS formula.
That seems like a bad example. I've often googled "cronjob foo" for how to schedule something in foo. Seems like "cronjob" is a general term for scheduling now.
A dashed arrow pointing in one direction is async data flow in that direction, A solid arrow is synchronous, and a swimlane / activity diagram shouldn't have two-way arrows in it (what would that mean?).
How is that more likely to be read wrong than source code? Doesn't match my experience at all.