jtmoulia π
love β₯ gameπ naming things is often called "the easiest problem in computer science" because you can just call it x or i or whatever
demofox@lovegame cache invalidation is nearly as easy cause you can just always clear the cache before every read.
Advanced Persistent Teapot
mcc
waffle π rust in paris
Kyle Brown 
jamesTown
irina [moved to critter.cafe]
Ian
ααα’
emily, blinkenlight witch
eirik αΈ'aα³
candle π@lovegame you can call things anything if you put "test" at the end of the name
john@lovegame *applause*
synlogic@lovegame well we used to call it X. THANKS ELON, NOT! ha
Clifford Adams@lovegame
Everything started going downhill when we started using names like x and i instead of the old descriptive names of foo and bar.
Everything started going downhill when we started using names like x and i instead of the old descriptive names of foo and bar.
Moz@wikicliff @lovegame I preferred it when we just had blocks of memory and it was up to us to remember where each variable started, which ones were numbers and which were letters. And how big each one was. And the byte order.
This was so easy that even BASIC supported it with PEEK() and POKE().
Narf (Fran Regen Period)@lovegame i like to name my variables in order so the first variable i make in my program is "one" and then the next is "two" and so on
chris martens@lovegame is this like how 4 is a perfectly good random number
Rai Aren πβ¨ππΊπ¦
Richard@lovegame I just call all of them x, even when I have more than one variable. The interpreter sorts it all out behind the scenes. It's only ever a problem if you do "unit testing," which is frowned upon.
John Harris@lovegame Naming variables is often a hard obstacle for me because of option paralysis.