[E-Lang] Proposed Naming Convention Changes

Bill Frantz frantz@pwpconsult.com
Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:05:53 -0700


At 10:35 AM -0700 8/22/01, Terry Stanley wrote:
>At 06:42 PM 8/21/01 -0700, Bill Frantz wrote:
>>At 3:28 PM -0700 8/21/01, Terry Stanley wrote:
>>>+++++ An update.
>>>Before I could send this message off, marcs tried out the new conventions on
>>>the examples in Walnut -- "vow" is fine but "pass" just doesn't work. He
>>>thinks we should drop "pass" and instead, use "grip". I like "grip" but it
>>>seems out-of-character with our other names -- such as "vow". But perhaps we
>>>can change "vow" to something that is in-character with "grip".
>>
>>How about using "remote", abbreviated to "rmt" instead of pass.  "Q" (for
>>"Queue") might also work.
>
>Hi Bill,
>
>The problem with remote (rmt) is that the reference could be local. The
>use of far (farCar) in the Walnut conventions had the same problem --
>since the car could be local, the use of far differed from what was
>defined in the taxonomy.

Perhaps it is my misunderstanding of the goal, but I think of the
convention as saying how I must treat the name, not what the actual value
bound to the name is.  If the name is fooRmt, it indicates to me that I
must treat it as remote, even if the current value bound to it is local.
Or I really am confused.

Cheers - Bill


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz           | The principal effect of| Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506         | DMCA/SDMI is to prevent| 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@pwpconsult.com | fair use.              | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA