Richard O'Keefe wrote > First, my message was *defending* most of the short names > that someone else was attacking. For the record, I am > *far* more worried about the fragility of typical Smalltalk > code than I am about method names, which are generally > pretty good. > > ...
If by "someone else" you mean me, I was obviously sarcastic. If you are OK with GCD, LCM, ULP and other abbreviations, why get rid of AST? It's well-known and unambigous term in respective area, that is also usually used as identifier in other programming languages and libraries (e.g. ast module in Python, Microsoft.FSharp.Compiler.Ast module in F#). -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
