[postgis-users] [GENERAL] $foo $bar is BAD

Peter Devoy peter at 3xe.co.uk
Fri Apr 15 20:10:34 PDT 2016

On 16 Apr 2016 3:21 am, "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
> For whatever it's worth, given the CoC discussions I didn't find that
> especially funny (or offensive or anything), but I did think it the
> sort of thing that could annoy people already sensitive to this sort
> of thing.
> A
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 03:00:59AM +0100, Peter Devoy wrote:
> > > Although people commonly use $foo $bar in examples, it is actually a misuse of a VERY rude acronym.
> >
> > > The next time you need to make an example, please try being a little more original (or meaningful) with your variable names.
> >
> > In light of recent CoC decisions, I would like to propose the
> > opposite.  I think more expletives would
> > diversify the language of the documentation and lower the barriers to
> > contribution by individuals more
> > dispositioned to use colourful language due to their cultural and/or
> > socioeconomic background. O:-)
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general at postgresql.org)
> > To make changes to your subscription:
> > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com

I shall note that it's still too sore a topic for list humour.  I hope
that anyone I may have annoyed
can seek comfort in the fact that I am an egalitarian and, by
extension, if I have accidentally
annoyed anyone, it is my sincere hope that I have annoyed everyone else equally!

And with that in mind, I was half serious about my point RE: the docs,
albeit an absurd one.  The
subtext was that, to me, it seems that an argument for removing 'rude'
words should hold as much
weight as one for introducing them or doing nothing at all.

Best wishes


More information about the postgis-users mailing list