Please, please, stop using "foo" and "bar” in code documentation. Give us real examples that mean something. Not "if (foo > bar)," but “if (height > limit)." Not “foo++” but “counter++”. Give us a logical hook to hang our hat on, not nonsense words.
@waldoj I came across this one time in Wikipedia and it completely ruined the ability to understand what the hell they were talking about.
@SwiftOnSecurity Every time I read the jq manual, I get annoyed at how hard it is to follow for this reason. It's a great tool but its manual is really dragged down with all the foo/bar/baz nonsense. https://stedolan.github.io/jq/manual/#Basicfilters
@waldoj @SwiftOnSecurity It has never made things much worse for me, but I've never been particularly sure why it was a practice either.
@lispi314 @waldoj @SwiftOnSecurity I have to say I am a bit baffled that people find the foo/bar convention to be confusing when used to document in a generic way. To me, it is just like the convention of using x in math.
The whole point is they are easy to recognize as things you need to replace.
However I realize some newer programmers consider this convention to be a kind of gate-keeping by us old-timers, and that would be bad. So maybe it is time to stop using our cherished foo and bar.
@eob @lispi314 @waldoj @SwiftOnSecurity PROTIP: Math is also bloody inscrutable and has a (well-earned) reputation for being so.
@mtomczak @eob @waldoj @SwiftOnSecurity The notation is useful for brevity for those that already know it, but it sure makes things a lot more complicated than they should be.