*Data structure* would be a possibility. My problem with it is that it already is in widespread use to refer to static storage organizations. As such it has no active component. An array is a data structure. But an array is not one of the sorts of things I want to include in the class of things I'm looking for a label for.
*Container *generically and *bag *are fine examples but they are too limited. I want a term that would also apply to map and reduce in functional programming and to code that implements a genetic algorithm once you pass that code a population, genetic operators that work on elements of the population, and a fitness function. Note that the population could be a population of any objects as far as the GA code is concerned. All that matters is that the genetic operators operate on them to produce new population elements. Similarly, the fitness function can take any population element and return a numeric value. The GA code doesn't care about any of that. But GA code is not a static structure like an array either. The various collection classes are included in my overall category when one thinks of them as classes that implement data structures. A list simply as a sequence of elements is static, but a List class is active in that it takes any objects (again forget about type parameters), stores them in order, and provides access to them with respect to that order. So it too is an active structure, not just a (static) data structure. I'm talking myself into *active structure*.. But I wish there were a standard term. Getting a newly coined term widely accepted is never easy. -- Russ On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Birchard Hayes <[email protected]> wrote: > Steve, > > I thought Container as well (although Bag leapt to mind too) but Russ > decided against so all that was left was the more abstract descriptor. > Besides, LISP has a data structure or two and underlying types, loosely > defined but they are there - IMHO "Data Structure" is neither procedural, > declarative, nor functional. Of course due to my current work situation I > am drawn to "bring me a rock" like a moth to the flame. > > I have a bottle of Irish Whiskey to replenish yours and Bourbon is always > good (rot gut or not) but you know that I can't condone burning books for > any reason! > > -Birch > > -- > > "Humanity is acquiring all the right technology for all the wrong reasons." > ~R. Buckminster Fuller > > **** Use of advanced messaging technology does not imply **** > ***** an endorsement of western industrial civilization ***** > > > > > On Sep 7, 2009, at 3:32 PM, Steve Smith wrote: > > Birchard Hayes wrote: >> >>> Data Structure >>> >> Birch... >> you are *so* not ObjectOrientedly Correct... you, you, you... >> PROCEDURAL PROGRAMMER! Bring your K&R Bible by the house and we will burn >> it ceremoniously. It is about time for my first cookstove fire of the >> season and tip a few glasses of Bulliett Bourbon while the cornbread browns >> and the beans and green chile simmer, fueled by the rightous fires of a >> burning C Programming manual. >> >> I'm still not tracking Russ's "twenty questions" game here well enough to >> be sure, but what I hear is simply a "Container Class"... or a particular >> conventional use of such for the purposes of doing some related/similar >> processing on all of the members. >> >> - Steve >> >> >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >> > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
