The name of the library is findr and I've noticed as I browse through the code asking myself: "what's fnr?". I am now realizing that this may just be a shorthand for findr? If this is a case I would like to suggest replacing fnr occurrences in code and documentation with findr and may even go as far as renaming the packages themselves.
Consider the following two import statements:
current import
import { fnr } from "@findr/text"
with fnr changed
import { findr } from "@findr/text"
I would say (2) above is more readable as fnr feels like a typo. Further, I would say that if one sees the function findr in their (potentially large) codebase they would immediately know what it is and which package it's associated with where as fnr requires an extra step for the developer's brain.
From a personal perspective I'm finding myself typing findr-text instead of fnr-text when running package commands
The name of the library is
findr
and I've noticed as I browse through the code asking myself: "what'sfnr
?". I am now realizing that this may just be a shorthand forfindr
? If this is a case I would like to suggest replacingfnr
occurrences in code and documentation withfindr
and may even go as far as renaming the packages themselves.Consider the following two import statements:
current import
with
fnr
changedI would say (2) above is more readable as
fnr
feels like a typo. Further, I would say that if one sees the functionfindr
in their (potentially large) codebase they would immediately know what it is and which package it's associated with where asfnr
requires an extra step for the developer's brain.From a personal perspective I'm finding myself typing
findr-text
instead offnr-text
when running package commands