[j_jochem]

`val` is never an appropriate name for a variable because it tells you nothing at all about what the variable contains.

[tomc1985]

Except when iterating through a hash, where 'key' and 'val' are my go-to names for stuff

[h1d]

Just use 'value'.

Only you can be sure of shortened words even if it looks obvious. Not good in a team.

I never understood people who shorten words to make the program look cryptic. Maybe it was someone who taught you how to program had it that way or somehow it makes you feel your program looks cooler if it looks more cryptic.

[eropple]

Agreed - at that point, I don't know why you wouldn't just (consistently) use 'k' and 'v'. 'val' adds some weird cognitive load, to me.

[tomc1985]

'value' is frequently a keyword or property on objects, and has specific meaning in a lot of contexts. For names, IMO 'k' and 'v' also work, but I find an abundance of single-letter variables hard to read. key and val it is.

[flamedoge]

I dunno, I am horizontally challenged. I like condensed code style like minimizing words, 2 spaces for indent, etc.

[flamedoge]

never is strong requirement. maybe it doesn't need to tell. Int::add(int val)

[rhizome]

I tend to use `num` in those spots.

[nobleach]

`val` isn't the variable name, it's the declaration. I'd imagine `val multiplier = 2' to make perfect sense. `var` likewise doesn't connote any truly valuable information other than the label for the memory location that follows is mutable.