On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:09 PM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Darin Adler <da...@apple.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 1, 2013, at 8:54 PM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: >> >> > You guys obviously never wrote any Lisp code. >> >> Lets not play this game. When I met Maciej he was the maintainer of one >> of the most popular Scheme implementations, if I remember correctly. >> > > Sorry, I forgot to add a smiley... :) > > Seriously, if "Atomic" isn't jargon, Intern isn't either. > Neither jargon is good but if we're renaming AtomicString, then the new name ought be significantly better than the old name because renaming WTF classes used everywhere has a cost: it makes Subversion history less useful and adds a churn; people reading the old code need to learn both equally bad jargons "atomic" and "interned" and that they're the same class. Another reason I don't think InternedString is a good name is the fact WTFString also does copy-on-write of StringIml. In general, the name of a class or a function should convey: 1. what the class does or how it's implemented 2. what the class is or should be used for AtomicString does 2 while InternedString does 1. We should try to come up with a name that does both. - R. Niwa
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
