www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Constness Naming Proposal

reply Chad J <gamerChad _spamIsBad_gmail.com> writes:
Perhaps we should name head constness and tail constness as such:

hiro = Head Is Read Only
tiro = Tail Is Read Only

Where "hiro" and "tiro" are new keywords for constness.
These names are made to reflect the notions of constness presented in 
the "Future of D, Part 2" talk at the D conference.

The only problem with it that I can think of is that the meanings of 
these algorithms aren't clear.  To that, I say that nothing short of a 
very jargon laden sentence would give a clear meaning of this concept.

The advantages:
- Very unlikely these are used much as variable names, if at all. 
Almost no code refactoring for adding these keywords.
- To newbies they should scream "Read the reference!"
- Allows us to reserve "const" for things that are truly CONSTANT*.
- Also not confusable with constant things (sorta same as above one).
- You can also make other keywords from the paradigm, ex: biro = body is 
read only, airo = all is read only (or aaro?).
- Short 4 characters, easy to type :)  Remember this will likely be used 
a lot (here a const, there a const).


* In the "Future of D, Part 2" talk there was also mention of functions 
that take constant parameters.  The proposed syntax was like so:

void foo( static int bar, int baz )
{
   // bar is a compile time constant, baz is runtime variable
}

If we freed up const from constness, we could have this:

void foo( const int bar, int baz ) { ... }

thus it is clear to non-C/C++ users that bar is constant.  The C/C++ 
users will get compile time errors if they use it incorrectly; nothing 
too insane.  Definitely worth it to drop the horrid "const" naming from 
C/C++ IMO.

Another note on this use of abbreviation, for those of us who are like 
me and usually don't like obfuscated abbreviations at all:
There is no english/technical word for constness.  We are condensing a 
few sentences or paragraphs of technical writing and meaning into a 
keyword or two.  We might as well make new words up.
Aug 25 2007
next sibling parent reply Paul <paul.d.anderson comcast.net> writes:
Chad J Wrote:


 Perhaps we should name head constness and tail constness as such:
 
 hiro = Head Is Read Only
 tiro = Tail Is Read Only
 
 Where "hiro" and "tiro" are new keywords for constness.
 These names are made to reflect the notions of constness presented in 
 the "Future of D, Part 2" talk at the D conference.
 


</snip>

 Another note on this use of abbreviation, for those of us who are like 
 me and usually don't like obfuscated abbreviations at all:
 There is no english/technical word for constness.  We are condensing a 
 few sentences or paragraphs of technical writing and meaning into a 
 keyword or two.  We might as well make new words up.


I kept nominating hconst for const(head) and tconst for const(tail) but I was
unable to sway the discussion. BTW, the const(head) and const(tail) notation
was Andre's -- it's very clear, just a little verbose.

As for English words for constness, I made a list using a thesaurus. Plenty of
words, although few are technical:

Invariant
Invariable
Fixed
Unvarying
Inflexible
Rigid
Unremitting
Persistent
Dependable
Consistent
Irrevocable
Definitive
Absolute
Unconditional
Permanent
Enduring
Everlasting
Eternal
Stable
Undeviating
Durable
Unwavering
Established
Steady
Staunch
Resolute
Unswerving
Faithful
Trustworthy
Loyal
Trusted
Obstinate
Determined
Resolved
Rigid
Stubborn
Hardheaded
Unyielding
Intransigent

Lots of words, some technical. I'm voting for 'resolute' for head const and
'intransigent' for tail const.

paul dot d dot anderson at comcast dot net
Aug 25 2007
parent reply Daniel Keep <daniel.keep.lists gmail.com> writes:
The problem is that they all mean (roughly) the same thing.

I mean, *why* is 'resolute' head const whilst 'intransigent' tail const?

I think the current words being used are fine since, let's face it, I
don't think there *are* English words for "head is read-only" and "tail
is read-only".  In the end, we'll have to pick a set of words
arbitrarily and *assign* them that meaning.

const(head) and const(tail) wouldn't go down too well since, as Chad
noted, they're too long and a pain to type.

	-- Daniel
Aug 25 2007
next sibling parent Paul Anderson <paul.d.anderson comcast.net> writes:
Daniel Keep Wrote:


 
 The problem is that they all mean (roughly) the same thing.
 
 I mean, *why* is 'resolute' head const whilst 'intransigent' tail const?
 
 I think the current words being used are fine since, let's face it, I
 don't think there *are* English words for "head is read-only" and "tail
 is read-only".  In the end, we'll have to pick a set of words
 arbitrarily and *assign* them that meaning.
 
 const(head) and const(tail) wouldn't go down too well since, as Chad
 noted, they're too long and a pain to type.
 
 	-- Daniel


I wasn't seriously suggesting them -- but that is the heart of the problem.
When Walter and Andre first presented the head-const/tail-const slides they
were using 'final' for one and 'const' for the other. I can't remember which
was which, but that, again, is the problem.

Paul
Aug 25 2007
prev sibling parent BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:
Reply to Daniel,


 The problem is that they all mean (roughly) the same thing.
 
 I mean, *why* is 'resolute' head const whilst 'intransigent' tail
 const?
 
 I think the current words being used are fine since, let's face it, I
 don't think there *are* English words for "head is read-only" and
 "tail is read-only".  In the end, we'll have to pick a set of words
 arbitrarily and *assign* them that meaning.
 
 const(head) and const(tail) wouldn't go down too well since, as Chad
 noted, they're too long and a pain to type.
 
 -- Daniel
 


how about for head const use "bound": the thing is permanently 'bound' to 
something (but that something might not be const

as for tail const... Don't know
Aug 25 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:
Chad J Wrote:


 hiro = Head Is Read Only
 tiro = Tail Is Read Only
 
 - Very unlikely these are used much as variable names, if at all.
 Almost no code refactoring for adding these keywords.


I guess I'll have to scrap my idea for a Snow Crash game...


 Obstinate
 Determined
 Resolved
 Rigid
 Stubborn
 Hardheaded
 Unyielding
 Intransigent


I'd love to have "stubborn" variables that refuse to change their type without
it being cast away.

All kidding aside, I think the way it is right now is arbitrary, but not that
bad. "final" = head-const, const=tail-const, invariant=tail-invariant
Aug 25 2007
prev sibling parent nobody <nobody5555 klassmaster.com> writes:
Chad J Wrote:

 Perhaps we should name head constness and tail constness as such:
 
 hiro = Head Is Read Only
 tiro = Tail Is Read Only



Just rename them to:

hiro = Head Is Read Only
ando = Tail Is Read Only

Every Heroes fan will know who uses the head and who follows the tail. Ja ja.

{{{(>.<)}}} (o.o) \(^o^)/
Aug 26 2007