On 23 Jun 2004, at 15:17, Steffen Goeldner wrote:
Adrian Howard wrote:[snip]
Sub::PartialApplication, Sub::Partial maybe?
Partial application is only part of the story - defered (or lazy) evaluation the other one.
True. But, for me, it would reveal more about the modules intent than Suspension would.
(I'm not disputing that the term 'suspension' is used in the context of
thunks and partial application - just that it's more commonly used in
other areas :-)
It seems that there are no objections against 'Suspension' (or 'Thunk') and the more I search for alternatives the more I'm convinced by these terms.
Erm... I thought both Aristotle and I objected? (or at least thought that it wasn't a revealing name.) It's /far/ more common for suspend/suspension to be used in the context of threads and coroutines in my experience and would, I think, confuse more than it would help.
Thunk would be better IMHO, although the way that MS used the term for shifting between 16/32 bit environments may be more familiar to some.
For me, personally, something like Sub::DeferedPartial would express the intent more clearly.
Adrian
