On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Eli Barzilay <[email protected]> wrote: > An hour ago, Carl Eastlund wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Eli Barzilay <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Three minutes ago, Carl Eastlund wrote: >> >> >> >> The Racketish name would be #%main, wouldn't it? >> > >> > Yes. But the problem is that `#%foo' names are intended to be >> > things that you don't write in end-user code, only if you >> > implement a new language or change some fundamental thing. In >> > that respect, the `#%' feels like serving the same role as `__', >> > which feels dirty. (I'm also trying to imagine the first-time >> > user impression being told to define `#%main' vs `main' -- the >> > first looks like it leads to an impression of some perl-like >> > language...) >> >> Yeah, I agree completely, I was just looking for alternatives to >> MAIN. Now we need an alternative to both. What was wrong with just >> main, again? (Looking back... oh, you said not clashing with >> existing code.) > > Yes. Unfortunately, reusing `main' means that current code that > current uses for it (to achieve two running modes) breaks. > > >> Well, we go in for verbose, self-explanatory names (e.g. >> current-command-line-arguments), how about the-main-program or >> start-program-here or something similar? > > I really want to find something short. Not only to make it very easy > to remember, but also to minimize the transition step from things like > > (printf "Hi, I'm a very quick script.\n") > > to > > (define (MAIN . _) > (printf "Look at me, I'm a more serious application now.\n")) > > BTW, I also considered `run', but that's something that I've used in a > few places, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. > > [/me fires up a thesaurus.] > > [/me gets frustrated.] > > How about one of these: > - `start' > - `launch' > - `execute' > - `act' > - `invoke' > - `*main*' > ? > > The thing that makes `main' more appealing is that it's conventional, > and that it's more like "the default entry point". That's why I > included the `*main*' thing. Also, given that any of these could be > used in an existing file, maybe some extra punctuation is inevitable. > So maybe things like `main.', `<main>', or `main:'? > > All of this makes me think that `MAIN' is better. Or maybe `Main'.
Both MAIN and Main are very un-Racketish names. I don't think they should be part of a common programming pattern. The appeal of main is strong enough I wonder if we might consider breaking legacy code in order to make this pattern idiomatic. Otherwise, my vote is for launch or start. --Carl _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
