On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Sven Hartrumpf wrote:

>How about shorter names (and making names analogous for read and write)?
>
>write-sharing (or write-shared or ...) instead of write-showing-shared
>read-sharing (or read-shared or ...)   instead of read-with-shared-structure

I like (write-showing-shared), but then my code is remarkable
for its whacking verbosity.  You're right that the name is
longer than most people will like.  Of the alternatives you
give, I like (write-shared) better than (write-sharing) --
it says better what is actually being done. But neither names
the operation as precisely as (write-showing-shared).

Maybe a (write/ss) shortcut, the same way (call/cc) popped up
in the wake of another function with an unpopularly long name?

What do others think?

				Bear