Gregory's ServerAs you might know, I'm writing a #xmpp messenger. At some point it became clear that it's more comfortable to separate my database low level interactions into separate library. Basically I just plan to use that library on my own, but I want it to be a separate repo, so, I want to make it beautiful, tested and documented and to be a standalone package in a system.
Now I'm struggling with the name. It's a c++ library around #lmdb basically made of the stuff I have ended up copy pasting around. Right now I've been calling it LMDBDataBase or just Storage, but it sounds so bad and generic.
Please give me some nice name options in the comments!
#programming
 11 comments
@drq@mastodon.ml quite nice, I like it! Do you think it's a problem that it's not clear of what it does? Definitely not for me, but I heard some people recommend avoiding it  @blue hard to say, but I'm a fan of creative names. Music converter named "Music Converter" tells nothing to me. Music converter named "Sound Juicer" makes me like "ah, THAT music converter".  @drq @blue When you're checking your 'dependencies.json', there are a lot of stuff there. So the clearer names are the better. When other people check your code it could be hard to understand too.  @skobkin @drq @blue You can get away with it though if it's a framework (Django, Flask, Rails) or is likely to be a center piece of software (Pandas, PyTorch, or more obscure Pedalboard, Satchless) And even for “boring” libraries, you have certain room for creativity – the name could be a pun on the kind of thing you're building, for example @skobkin @drq @blue from starlette.applications import Starlette already gives you a rough idea what Starlette might be, even if you're not familiar with it. @blue |
@blue blitz