I despise the names Dependency Injection and Inversion of Control, not because they're inaccurate, but because they're intimidating to the new developer and thus feel a bit inaccessible. Names like these foster impostor syndrome by being a bit too pretentious for something as simple as moving construction of an object to outside the object via constructor parameter.
And no... I don't have a better name, I just hate the ones we currently use.
I agree that inversion of control might not be the best name, mainly because it's too generic and can get confusing because of that. But what's wrong with dependency injection? It's literally telling what it does: you inject those dependencies from the outside instead of creating them yourself, and dependency is pretty self-explanatory.
There's much worse names out there than these, IMO.
I know, maybe I didn't explain myself. I don't see anything pretentious or intimidating about them. All technical fields are full of technical words and if the accuracy of the words is on point then I don't know what the problem with them is.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I despise the names Dependency Injection and Inversion of Control, not because they're inaccurate, but because they're intimidating to the new developer and thus feel a bit inaccessible. Names like these foster impostor syndrome by being a bit too pretentious for something as simple as moving construction of an object to outside the object via constructor parameter.
And no... I don't have a better name, I just hate the ones we currently use.
Auto-wiring might be better? What do you think?
For IoC yeah, that or just provider container.
For DI, I think you could still say constructor / parameter / property injection, possibly. Maybe instead of DI you call it a "decoupling pattern".
Either way, our current names are here to stay, I just wish they induced less anxiety to those who don't understand them yet.
Yeah I really like the "decoupling pattern". I'm gonna use it from now on.
I agree that inversion of control might not be the best name, mainly because it's too generic and can get confusing because of that. But what's wrong with dependency injection? It's literally telling what it does: you inject those dependencies from the outside instead of creating them yourself, and dependency is pretty self-explanatory.
There's much worse names out there than these, IMO.
My concerns as stated weren't around the accuracy of the names.
I know, maybe I didn't explain myself. I don't see anything pretentious or intimidating about them. All technical fields are full of technical words and if the accuracy of the words is on point then I don't know what the problem with them is.