←back to thread

311 points todsacerdoti | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
benrutter ◴[] No.46237011[source]
> Our field deserves better than a zoo of random nouns masquerading as professional nomenclature. Clarity isn’t boring, it’s respect for your users’ time and cognitive resources.

I felt a little guilty at first, I maintain a project called Wimsey (it's a data testing library but you couldn't guess that) and at work my team regularly enjoys fun/silly names.

Trying to defend myself, I was thinking about various logical responses to this article: non-descriptive names don't become out of place when a projects goals drift; descriptive names will lead to repitition; etc.

If I'm honest though, I think I just like software to have a sense, even a tiny one, of enjoyment.

The software I use everyday, like Cron (named after a greek god of time); Python (named after a comedy act) and Zellij (names after a tiling craft) all have fun, joyful names that tell me someone loved and cared about these projects when they built them.

I need to learn these tools beyond just "x does y category of thing" anyway, so I don't mind learning these names. And it makes software engineering just a bit more fun than using "unix-scheduler", "object-oriented-scripting-lang" or "terminal-display-manager".

I love working in a field where people are passionate about their craft. Stern professionalism doesn't sound like something I want to trade that for.

It's a human trait to name the things we love, that's the exact reason why pets typically have names like "cookie" and not "brown-dog-2".

replies(3): >>46237284 #>>46238772 #>>46239584 #
layer8 ◴[] No.46239584[source]
Some people are passionate about being professional in the sense of doing things competently and expertly. Cuteness is inherently a mental distraction from what you really care about in the craft, which is why it appears tonally inappropriate. The desire to add some sort of cuteness is taken as an indication that the person apparently doesn’t derive enough joy from the workmanship itself. In other words, a lack of caring about and being fulfilled by the actual work, so that you need to add something “fun” on top.
replies(1): >>46240326 #
necovek ◴[] No.46240326[source]
But that's trivially provable to not be true. You can easily be both: dedicated and professional in your work, and fun and flimsy where possible.

I mean, all the funny names of great software in this thread and even OP are a testament to that.

replies(1): >>46240479 #
1. shermantanktop ◴[] No.46240479{3}[source]
And it’s a lowkey flex. Look, I can be technical wiz and have a sense of humor at the same time!