Thread: $foo $bar is BAD

Anyone that has done time in the military, and other goverment agencies, has been introduced to the term fubar, which stands for "fouled up beyond all repair". Although fouled was replaced by another similar word where the 2nd, 3rd and 4th letters were substituted with other letters that gave more significance to it. Over time, fu was somehow misheard as foo, and coders commonly started using it in examples. Not Cool!

-- 
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com> writes:
> On 4/15/2016 4:35 PM, Melvin Davidson wrote:
>> *Anyone that has done time in the military, and other goverment
>> agencies, has been introduced to the term fubar, which stands for
>> "fouled up beyond all repair". Although fouled was replaced by another
>> similar word where the 2nd, 3rd and 4th letters were substituted with
>> other letters that gave more significance to it. Over time, fu was
>> somehow misheard as foo, and coders commonly started using it in
>> examples. Not Cool!*

> omg, grow up.

FWIW, the Jargon File (a/k/a Hackers Dictionary) says that "foo" can be
traced back further than "fubar", making the OP's claim rather backwards.
In any case, it's an old enough term that nobody is going to give it up
on such grounds.

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/F/foo.html

            regards, tom lane

On Friday, April 15, 2016 8:13:56 PM EDT Melvin Davidson wrote:
> *Thanks for the sympathetic feedback John. I understand people are
> reluctant to change. It was just my intent to enlighten others as to the
> true background behind it.*
> *So if it's not about to change, then I'll just have to cry $boo $hoo, $oye
> $vey. :)*

Reading this:

  http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/80609

it appears to me that the true origin is not what you claim it to be, but pre-
war MIT pranksters.

And besides: language evolves. Words change meaning over time. Nobody typing
'foo = 2*bar' thinks about WW2 acronym, and everybody reading it immediately
understands it, again without referring to that acronym.

The horse is dead, Jim. Stop beating it.

> 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:-)

On 04/15/2016 04:35 PM, Melvin Davidson wrote:
> *Although people commonly use $foo $bar in examples, it is actually a
> misuse of a VERY rude acronym.

Actually it isn't.

>
> *The next time you need to make an example, please try being a little
> more original (or meaningful) with your variable names.
> *

I don't see this happening.

JD


>
> --
> *Melvin Davidson*
> I reserve the right to fantasize.  Whether or not you
> wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.


--
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/
                         +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.

On 16/04/16 14:00, 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
variablenames. 
> 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:-)
>
>
Peter,

You're just a misbegotten son of a Third Hand Camel Dealer!  :-)


Cheers,
Gavin