Bad naming?

Example C++ code

The above fragment is from [1]. I never write loops like this. I use $n$ for limits or counts, but never for a loop index.

Looking at this, I realized I have many of these "rules". Such as:

1. $x$, $y$, $z$, and $v$, $w$ are always double precision variables. (I used to subtract points if a student would write
       for (int x=0; ... ).
2. $i$, $j$, $k$ and $m$, $n$ are always integer variables.
3. Never use $l$ (i.e. $\ell$) as variable name, it is too close to the digit 1 (one).
4. Don't use short integers (unless for a specific reason) or single precision variables.
5. Use $i$,$j$,$k$ as loop indices in a predictable way (e.g. for a (sparse) matrix: $i$ for rows, $j$ for columns, $k$ for things like nonzero elements).
6. The previous rule also applies to AMPL which uses local index names. E.g. after declaring
      param f_max {j in FOOD} >= f_min[j]; 
   I always use j for FOOD. 
7. Use short names for items (variables) that are often used and for locally declared indices. Use long names for items that are sparsely used. I call this Huffman-code [2] naming. 

I am so used to this, that code that disobeys this in a flagrant way, just hurts my eyes. I find that, if I follow these simple rules, reading code is easier. It minimizes the surprise factor. Of course, writing code is for consumption by a compiler (or other tool), but more importantly: for consumption by a human reader.

So, that loop should look like:

const int n = 10;
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {...}

References

1. https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/numeric/random/uniform_int_distribution
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huffman_coding