Why include the letters Std then? This seems like a purposeful typo-squatting effort and definitely makes me suspicious.

Misra and not Mishra? You randomly drop the h? And it just so happens dropping the H makes it a typo squat basically.

Siddharth has a T after the D. So std should be sdt.. at best.

Just be honest lol

Because it seems like you're being purposefully obtuse at this point.

Not all people can pronounce names correctly. In a language some names are easier to pronounce if you take away a few letters. Some may find using Sid as short form for Siddharth, because it's just easier.

Now from my childhood, some friends used to pronounce my name differently. I noticed that they don't use the 'h' in Mishra, so I started using 'Misra' instead. They found it easier to pronounce and I felt connected more. Those who could pronounce it correctly, still used Misra because it's just easier and sounds more personal. Friends and loved ones do that. It's also sometimes called as a nickname, where you give other names to a loved one.

Now, it also just happens that my native language has the same root word for Misra and Mishra aaaand they mean the same! It essentially means a mixture of different things.

Now even if all this this reason does not sound good to you, just ignore it. It is my project, my name. I can pronounce however I want, with whatever spelling I want. A project is named by it's maintainer. I can name it exactly MISRA and still be happy with it because it's my project, I'm the maintainer.

I did mention that this is not related to the MISRA standard because I felt like users should know and not confuse it with my library.

I tried to ignore this matter but people over internet just keep poking you saying you're dishonest. Please don't bother yourself with the name of things, just use it if you need it otherwise ignore it. It's an advice for life. Name of things does not matter, it's what they do and achieve. I've put honest work into this library and I won't accept someone sitting behind a screen just say that I'm dishonest, I'm purposefully choosing this name. It is my name, I chose it, names clash in this world at least. Two entities can have same name but of different origin and use case.

Thanks for reading this if you read it till here.

Did you really think naming something MisraStdC, then posting it to the internet, then rationalizing it wouldn't be noticed?

It's not even your name or a standard.

It really looks like you are trying to name it something that people would find from searches then somehow walk it back and come with a story after.

I would personally find it really difficult to produce a scream that replicated the sound of abject terror produced by the whistle.

[1]: https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/butterfly.html

This can be accomplished in statically typed languages too. For example, Java has an ORM called Cayenne that generates models based on database tables. You can get similar functionality and ensure you're not accidentally calling something like `find_by_nam`

And like I said above while you might be able to recreate some of Rails' functionality in other languages, you wouldn't be able to replicate all of it with the same fluidity and readability that you have in Rails

    def log_then_get(url, context)
      puts "Requesting #{url}..."
      get(url, context)
    end
 
    def get(uri, context)
      response = Net::HTTP.get(uri)
      puts caller(0).join("\n")
      response
    end
 
    def get_http_thread(url)
      Thread.new do
        log_then_get(URI(url), Thread.current)
      end
    end

1) get_http_thread takes a url (String) and converts it to a URI object

2) log_then_get defines its parameter as `url`, but really its expecting a URI object

3) get defines its parameter as `uri`, but we're passing it an argument called `url` from within log_then_get.

Lots of traps readily awaiting an unsuspecting programmer or newcomer to a project that contains code like this.

I'm guessing their use of "disintegrated" there is supposed to be taken literally as dis-integrated, but upon first read, I took it for its more colloquial meaning (which to me is closer to pulverized, turn to dust, dissolve etc).