I think Michel and Shawn did raise some good points here. -Thorsten
> Am 03.04.2016 um 22:27 schrieb Shawn Erickson via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org>: > >> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:41 AM Michel Fortin via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: >> > What is your evaluation of the proposal? >> >> I don't like "form" as a prefix. To me there is no difference between >> `union` and `formUnion`: both sounds functional-style, and actually the >> second one perhaps a bit more to my ears. There's basically two dictionary >> definitions of "form": >> >> 1. "bring together parts or combine to create (something)" which to me >> implies a new value is created, and >> 2. "make or fashion into a certain shape or form" which would imply that the >> material you start with is transformed, which is apparently the intended >> meaning and also the reverse meaning from the above. >> >> I mean, doesn't this make sense as an API? >> >> let donut = baker.formDonut(dough) // non-mutating >> >> Perhaps instead of "form" we could use "become" as a prefix when the >> operation is naturally described by a noun. That would seem less ambiguous >> to me: >> >> a.becomeUnion(b) >> a.becomeIntersection(b) >> a.becomeSuccessor(b) >> >> It's a bit passive, but I find it fits well when the operation is a noun. >> >> And there's no way the term lends itself to non-mutating cases without >> things becoming nonsensical: >> >> let donut = baker.becomeDonut(dough) // non-mutating? > > I also am having difficulty coming to terms with the use of "form" (I am a > native English speaker). As you note "form" can imply the creation of > something from parts (more like assembling a new thing) as well as the > creation of something out of a material say a of block clay (more like > molding something out of an existing thing). It doesn't seem clear cut to me > to imply in place mutation. > > Additionally my eyes / brain keep seeing "from" instead of "form". This type > of issue is generally true with any short word made up of the same set of > letters (made worse since "from" is more common in programming then "form"). > The mind quickly narrows in on a set of possible words given the letters we > see and then uses context to help get the correct one and/or additional > visual parsing to understand the exact ordering of letters (more energy > expended). Anyway since I keep seeing "from" instead of "form" I keep going > in the direction of thinking it returns something made from the two (or more) > items involved (not really sure why "from" goes that direction in my head, it > could also go the in place direction). > > I would prefer something other then "form" (note I just typed "from" by > mistake)... I think your suggestion of "become" has merit. > > y.becomeUnion(x) --reads to me as--> "y become union with x" > y.formUnion(x) --read to me as--> "y from oops... y forming a union of x" > y.becomeIntersection(x) --reads to me as--> "y become intersection with x" > y.formIntersection(x) --read to me as--> "y from oops... y forming an > intersection with x" > > In the "forming" situations it – to me – is ambiguous on if that is in place > or not. To me it implies more of giving something new back. > > I am -1 on "form" aspect of this proposal. ...of course things are learnable > as long as things are fairly consistent and not to far out of the norm for > typical language use. Personally I don't see "form" as that typical in > English. > > -Shawn > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
