I'm personally OK with 'ast'. Did I write anything that made you think I wasn't?
Of course things are contextual. In VMS one took "AST" to mean "Asynchronous System Trap". But even in VMS it was not confusing in a parsing context. As for "obviously sarcastic", I'm afraid there's this thing called "Poe's Law". On 9 May 2018 at 23:57, webwarrior <r...@webwarrior.ws> wrote: > 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 > >
