Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!amdcad!lll-crg!gymble!umcp-cs!chris
From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: net.sources.bugs,net.sources.d
Subject: Re: Using identifiers with more than 7 chars. #$%@
Message-ID: <227@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Mar-86 18:06:26 EST
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.227
Posted: Wed Mar 12 18:06:26 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 14-Mar-86 07:29:22 EST
References: <526@dsi1.UUCP> <29@gilbbs.UUCP> <408@ucbjade.BERKELEY.EDU> <47@gilbbs.UUCP> <181@srs.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 53
Xref: watmath net.sources.bugs:727 net.sources.d:17

In article <181@srs.UUCP> forrest@srs.UUCP writes:

> ...  I think that Mr. Keller is forgetting a very important
>point.  He is getting this software free.  It is written at the
>EXPENSE of the author only.

This is not entirely true.  There is a cost incurred in each article
and each transmission, at each site.  But it is important to remember
that one's presence on Usenet is voluntary.  If you do not like
what you see, you may always withdraw.  Change for the better is
a noble goal, but abuse and insults are unlikely to acheive it.
(Please note that I am not speaking of Forrest's article, but rather
some of those that preceded it.)

As long as I am standing on my soapbox here (well, a virtual soapbox,
if you will), I shall state my own opinions about long identifiers.
I use them.  I will continue to use them.  I have in the past used,
and probably will (on occasion) use in the future, systems with
rather strict limits on identifier length---often six characters,
single case, or even two characters, single case.  (What was the
last system?  Microsoft BASIC for the TRS-80.  I wrote a complete
Z80 assembler on that beast*; it handled arbitrarily long programs
by keeping its symbol table in a disk file, and incidentally had
eight significant characters, upper and lower case.)  When using
such a system I will put up with its restrictions as long as I
must.  But as I am not now restricted, I will not concern myself
with significant lengths.  Why?  Because I feel that the names
themselves are more important to me than the potential lack of
portability.  It is not my intent to write unportable programs;
but I have dealt with name length restrictions; I know the effect
of short names, and I do not like it.

Now this is all well and good as long as I am writing code for
local use.  But what if I post it?  Is it not unfair to some?
Probably---but I am not posting it for them; I am posting it for
those who *can* use it.   ---And even if your compiler will not
handle my program as it stands, you may be able to fix that, in
less time than it would take to write your own version.  And if
you cannot use it at all, then please pass over it in silence, or
at the most, simply state that you would like to have been able to
use it, but were not, and would coders please remember that some
systems have stricter limits, and that if they want their programs
to be useful to all, they should keep this in mind.  I think all
involved will benefit more from this than from flames to the effect
that `it does not work on Widget Inc's compiler'.

-----
*Probably the world's slowest assembler, it ran at the tremendous
rate of 30 line a minute---per pass.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 1415)
UUCP:	seismo!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet:	chris@umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris@mimsy.umd.edu