A reference type
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(18 Aug 2022 21:45 UTC)
|
Re: A reference type
John Cowan
(19 Aug 2022 01:36 UTC)
|
Re: A reference type
Lassi Kortela
(19 Aug 2022 10:03 UTC)
|
Re: A reference type
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(19 Aug 2022 10:11 UTC)
|
Re: A reference type
Lassi Kortela
(19 Aug 2022 10:25 UTC)
|
Places in Scheme
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(19 Aug 2022 10:42 UTC)
|
Re: Places in Scheme
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(19 Aug 2022 11:36 UTC)
|
Re: Places in Scheme
Per Bothner
(19 Aug 2022 16:33 UTC)
|
Re: Places in Scheme
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(19 Aug 2022 17:58 UTC)
|
Re: Places in Scheme
Panicz Maciej Godek
(25 Aug 2022 15:20 UTC)
|
Re: Places in Scheme
Ray Dillinger
(26 Aug 2022 02:29 UTC)
|
Re: A reference type
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(19 Aug 2022 10:54 UTC)
|
Re: A reference type
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(19 Aug 2022 11:44 UTC)
|
Re: A reference type
Peter Bex
(19 Aug 2022 12:02 UTC)
|
Re: A reference type
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(19 Aug 2022 12:26 UTC)
|
Big words
Lassi Kortela
(19 Aug 2022 16:29 UTC)
|
Re: Big words Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (19 Aug 2022 18:07 UTC)
|
Re: Big words
Lassi Kortela
(19 Aug 2022 20:06 UTC)
|
Re: Big words
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(19 Aug 2022 20:31 UTC)
|
Re: Big words
blake@xxxxxx
(19 Aug 2022 22:06 UTC)
|
Re: Big words
blake@xxxxxx
(19 Aug 2022 22:08 UTC)
|
Re: Big words
Arthur A. Gleckler
(19 Aug 2022 18:09 UTC)
|
Re: Big words
John Cowan
(19 Aug 2022 18:39 UTC)
|
Am Fr., 19. Aug. 2022 um 18:30 Uhr schrieb Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io>: > > locative > > ephemeron > > assertion > > violation > > reference I like these more than loc, eph, ass, vio, ref. Or what do you have in mind? PS I am not a native speaker of English, but I have never had a problem with these "big" (by whatever metric) words. At least to me, precision in wording is more important than brevity, so better use two not-so-short words for two different things than to name the two different things by the same short word. Personally, I think the existing traditions in naming should also be respected if it makes sense. E.g., R6RS makes the distinction between "errors" and "violations" (in its condition hierarchy). When future Scheme standards adopt this division, there are good reasons for sticking to these established terms instead of calling these types, say, "user error" and "programmer error", just to get rid of the "big" word "violation".