I'm personally OK with 'ast'.�� Did I write anything that made you

think I wasn't?

Of course things are contextual.�� In VMS one took "AST" to mean

"Asynchronous System Trap".���� But even in VMS it was not confusing

in a parsing context.

As for "obviously sarcastic", I'm afraid there's this thing

called "Poe's Law".

On 9 May 2018 at 23:57, webwarrior <reg@webwarrior.ws> wrote:

Richard O'Keefe wrote
> First, my message was *defending* most of the short names
> that someone else was attacking.�� For the record, I am
> *far* more worried about the fragility of typical Smalltalk
> code than I am about method names, which are generally
> pretty good.
>
> ...

If by "someone else" you mean me, I was obviously sarcastic. If you are OK
with GCD, LCM, ULP and other abbreviations, why get rid of AST? It's
well-known and unambigous term in respective area, that is also usually used
as identifier in other programming languages and libraries (e.g. ast module
in Python, Microsoft.FSharp.Compiler.Ast module in F#).

--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html