Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!iuvax!bsu-cs!dhesi From: dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Rahul Dhesi) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Just Wondering Message-ID: <6930@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> Date: 25 Apr 89 04:02:44 GMT References: <6899@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> <12565@lanl.gov> Reply-To: dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Rahul Dhesi) Distribution: na Organization: CS Dept, Ball St U, Muncie, Indiana Lines: 22 In article <12565@lanl.gov> jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes: >Math texts also tend to use one character identifiers for all objects >under consideration. I don't suppose you also recommend limiting >identifiers to one character?!? There *is* a reason for mathematicians to use single-character identifiers. This is because a large fraction of mathematical expressions contain some type of product, and it's very convenient to be able to say "abc" and mean "a * b * c". Once you begin with the convention that abc is a product of three terms, it's confusing to do otherwise in the same book or journal. Most computer programs do not necessarily involve products, so it pays to give up the convenience of mathematical notation to gain clarity by using longer identifiers. But single-character identifiers *are* useful. Most loop counters are one-char identifiers. When you are evaluating a conventional mathematical expression it often pays stick to that format. -- Rahul Dhesi UUCP: ...!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesi