> John Kodis wrote:
> > Mathematics has a rich tradition of using short variable names such as
> > "pi" rather than something like "circle-circumference-to-diameter-ratio".
> > They keep formulas from becoming unreadably long, and have a meaning
> > which is well understood in context. While the long version may more
> > self-explainatory, it's the short form which is universally preferred.
> While 'pi', 'e', 'theta', 'phi', etc. are universally understood, things
> like 'i', 'a', and 'idx' are not.
I'd certainly call 'i' well understood in both math and computing. In
math, 'i' is what engineers call 'j' (i*i == -1), and in computing, 'i'
('j', 'k', ...) is a counter for loops (some variant of int) that don't
exceed about a screenful.
> I can use these for anything I want
> and even for more than one thing,
Of course, if you use them differently from what the convention is, *then*
you are in trouble.
> and they say nothing about what they
> are for. 'i', 'j', etc. are fine as loop counters and array indexes
> where their meaning is apparent by context, but are _not_ fine in other
> situations. You (or the person that wrote the code) may think that the
> name is perfectly fine, but someone else that thinks a bit different may
> not.
Yup.
MfG Kai
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/