61–70 of 339 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Amazon Web Services?
"Amazon Web Services" could mean literally anything. It only seems obvious and descriptive because it's become a widely known brand. Compare: "Nile Online Frameworks"
No simple name can describe the job 100% after a certain level of complexity anyway.
I do like the Intel code names like Tiger Lake, Light Peak and Ivy Ridge. They evoke some kind of combination of Manhattan project megaproject and just-charted territory.
I don't like them - they were OK when talking about 6-8 chips in 3-4 generations. But after the 30th different lake you get thoroughly confused. Apple did it better, switching from big cats to big cliffs after ten releases...
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!
Also, unique. Or at least unique-ish. Whoever named the ML thing "transformer" deserves a special place in hell. So many intriguing headlines, so few things worth reading. (I'm an EE, so I'm very interested in the other transformers. For some reason, the headlines for these things scan like they could apply to either. Alas, they don't.)
Your complaint is similar to cryptography conference attendants hating the word ,,crypto'' to change from cryptography to cryptocurrency, but that's just the natural evolution of language with technology (not mentioning that the original meaning of the Greek word is hidden/secret).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. The advice is contextual. If you're making a public web framework, probably don't call it Web Framework. If you work at a company and you're writing the one and only hotel booking service, do call it Hotels instead of forcing your coworkers to memorize yet another cute name.
This only works once though. In ten years, none of the original developers of Hotels are with the company. The new generation of engineers is upset both with Hotels’ limitations and the fact that it’s not written in XYZ language which they really want to have on their résumés. So they embark on a total rewrite of Hotels, and to emphasize the awesomeness, most likely it will be called either Phoenix (because one out o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. The advice is contextual. If you're making a public web framework, probably don't call it Web Framework. If you work at a company and you're writing the one and only hotel booking service, do call it Hotels instead of forcing your coworkers to memorize yet another cute name.
This only works once though. In ten years, none of the original developers of Hotels are with the company. The new generation of engineers is upset both with Hotels’ limitations and the fact that it’s not written in XYZ language which they really want to have on their résumés. So they embark on a total rewrite of Hotels, and to emphasize the awesomeness, most likely it will be called either Phoenix (because one out o…
I do like the Intel code names like Tiger Lake, Light Peak and Ivy Ridge. They evoke some kind of combination of Manhattan project megaproject and just-charted territory.
I don't like them - they were OK when talking about 6-8 chips in 3-4 generations. But after the 30th different lake you get thoroughly confused. Apple did it better, switching from big cats to big cliffs after ten releases...
When I think of programming things I use the most, most of them have whimsical names that mean nothing.
I mean, say, “grep” means… something with regular expressions I guess? But nobody cares. It’s just “grep”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
This is my stance. 2 words: Memorable Use. Banana Cache Hadouken Security Service Lightfoot Containers I mean, this is pretty much the AWS formula.
I'll keep this formula in mind too, and use it when I develop something bigger.