João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com> writes:
> Since when are names "intuitive"? Do I have any intuition about who
> you are or what you do from your name alone? Names are abstract
> indirections by definition (with some 20th century structuralist and
> post-structuralist caveats that I really don't think apply here).
Intuitive in the sense that you can reasonably infer information given
previous experiences. I know that [languagename]-mode is usually a
major mode for a language. A package name like "hl-diff" gives a rough
idea of what the package is about, when you know that "hl" stands for
highlight. Something like "highlight-parentheses" is obvious. If you
know about VC, then "vc-fossil" is an intuitive name.
Those are all phrases in disguise. Even "hl" is really two things.
One could have come up with a short phrase instead of Eglot, say
"emacs-very-bueno" or sth like that. That would probably be more intuitive.
But also probably silly, and easy to miss the target.
None of this makes any difference to the fact that Eglot is the best
name for referring to exactly what Eglot is.
João