Why are cryptic short identifiers still so common in low-level programming?
- by romkyns
There used to be very good reasons for keeping instruction / register names short. Those reasons no longer apply, but short cryptic names are still very common in low-level programming.
Why is this? Is it just because old habits are hard to break, or are there better reasons?
For example:
Atmel ATMEGA32U2 (2010?): TIFR1 (instead of TimerCounter1InterruptFlag), ICR1H (instead of InputCapture1High), DDRB (instead of DataDirectionPortB), etc.
.NET CLR instruction set (2002): bge.s (instead of branch-if-greater.signed), etc.
Aren't the longer, non-cryptic names easier to work with?