I like coaching for the (formerly known as) performance report tool. A lot!
I was suggesting "tuning" for the collection that would house the future visualizer and the performance coach and hopefully eventually a memory profiler. (And maybe Eli's profiler could move in there someday too.) Robby On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Matthias Felleisen <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > > On Jul 11, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Robby Findler wrote: > >> Would "tuning" work? > > They were correct, and you conjectured correctly. We conflated 'optimization' > with 'performance gains.' As everyone knows who has been around real > compilers and their writers, some 'optimizations' are 'pessimizations' as > Keith used to call them. And of course even when 'optimizations' reduce the > running time and/or the space consumption, they aren't _optimizations_ as > John Dennis used to remind us. There is a similar conflation that additional > related work pointed out. People tend to confuse 'analysis results' with 'can > do optimization'. This is certainly not true for in-lining in Racket and if > you know of more those optimizations, I'd love to hear about them. > > 'Tuning' would work but we decided that 'coaching' was a good term for what > was going on from the programmer's perspective. And the word isn't used > anywhere else in CS as far as I know, while other terms (including 'tuning') > are used and may have a different connotation. > _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
