News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Names should be cute, not descriptive. Parent comment

Re:Names should be cute, not descriptive by doctor_eval on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @01:58AM (#34321446)
But that's my point. You start writing a new policy engine, and you think the name is obviously descriptive. But in 12 months time, it's not so obvious any more, and also you probably have 3 different policy engines for different use cases.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Names should be cute, not descriptive by ummonk on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @02:01AM (#34321472)
Anybody who thinks it's descriptive even at the start is an idiot.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Names should be cute, not descriptive by doctor_eval on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @02:06AM (#34321500)
Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Names should be cute, not descriptive by bryanrasmussen on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @06:47AM (#34323375)
Ok but the image-optimization-engine that Carl wrote still seems descriptive to me those same 12 months later.

So I think policy-engine might have seemed descriptive but it just wasn't whereas image-optimization-engine was descriptive.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Names should be cute, not descriptive by Drakim on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @08:42AM (#34324701)
At least until it also starts converting gifs to webm, and soon other formats like mp4, and since it's being used for video it needs subtitle support in various languages.
[ Parent | on HN ]