At the same time, I liked .NET's no-nonsense naming of namespaces. When I see something like System.Threading.Tasks, I can immediately recognise that it's a namespace that deals with task-based parallelism. Then you have tokio in Rust and I want to stab the person that came up with the name. Same for clap and serde. They mean nothing unless you already know what those packages do.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Yeah except that it's literally called .NET, pronounced dot net, they included a punctuation symbol in the name. Is it a programming language for the web, nope. So why's it called that?

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

.NET is branding that Steve Ballmer came up with, and yes, it was originally meant to be a set of network and internet frameworks. The .NET Framework was an underlying interface that other .NET products would use. It was then superseded by .NET Core, which was later renamed to .NET.

[–] eronth@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

The people making the programming language and related tooling seem to know what's up.

The people making other various products all seem to want to be a super special naming boy.

[–] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 1 points 1 week ago

You're comparing system packages to user-provided packages.

User-provided packages need to have names that are easily searchable. If you named a package eg threading, searching for $PROGRAMMING_LANGUAGE threading would give you a ton of irrelevant results