On Jul 11, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Robby Findler wrote: > Would "tuning" work?
They were correct, and you conjectured correctly. We conflated 'optimization' with 'performance gains.' As everyone knows who has been around real compilers and their writers, some 'optimizations' are 'pessimizations' as Keith used to call them. And of course even when 'optimizations' reduce the running time and/or the space consumption, they aren't _optimizations_ as John Dennis used to remind us. There is a similar conflation that additional related work pointed out. People tend to confuse 'analysis results' with 'can do optimization'. This is certainly not true for in-lining in Racket and if you know of more those optimizations, I'd love to hear about them. 'Tuning' would work but we decided that 'coaching' was a good term for what was going on from the programmer's perspective. And the word isn't used anywhere else in CS as far as I know, while other terms (including 'tuning') are used and may have a different connotation. _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
