Recommendation on naming elements

Rather than referring to an item using the possessive using apostrophes it might be worth thinking about reversing the order and using “of”.

Example
Current Cell’s Task’s Description’s value
Would become:
value of Description of Task of Current Cell.

While this would be only slightly more direct it would mean that in places where the reference is truncated you would see the more specific name, rather than just seeing the parent repeated over and over again.

1 Like

Good idea. This would make the dynamic code easier to read.

While an interesting suggestion, note that this type of reverse notation would be impossible (literally impossible, not just difficult) to construct in a point-and-click fashion. (You can’t start with the endpoint and construct the list of all possible paths that lead to that endpoint at each more general step.)

So this is a non-starter. Unless you’re proposing that, once one builds an expression, that the expression invert itself to this syntax. This would be annoying in the extreme.

I get where you’re coming from, but how would you ever build this expression:

Also, if you think this expression looks crazy now, try translating it to the reverse notation you propose.

Expressions are not just for simply referencing some field on some Thing. Expressions are expressions.

3 Likes

Could the editor just construct right to left with the of’s instead of the usual right to left with 's?

There is some merit to readability, but I have to side with Keith. The biggest pain point would be when copying a long and difficult expression into a different element type. I rely on being able to drop in the middle of the expression, correctly be able to interpret the number of backspaces that need to be hit to re-inject the right new expression tree, etc. Rebuilding expressions right-to-left inside of a master expression that naturally reads left-to-right would not be worth the small gains in readability.

1 Like