2008/12/26 Alex Boisvert <[email protected]>

> Just brainstorming here...  not sure if we're beating a dead horse... but
> about Option3 to signify it has 3 states?  (i.e. Some3, None3, Error3)
>
> It's uglier but could be easier to explain and understand.


Personally, it took me a lot to get the concept of Option... mainly because
to me, an Option is this or that, not some or none.  Optional would have
been a better choice as is Maybe.  In fact, it wasn't until I was playing
around with Haskell and the Maybe monad, that I finally "got" Options.  I
would despise the idea of perpetuating what I consider to be one of Scala's
weakest naming schemes.

It's going to stay "Can", but if I had it to do all over, I'd call it Box.

Thanks for all your respective thoughts on the subject.

David

PS -- The code is pretty much frozen for Lift.  There'll be a few last
minute minor changes between now and Jan 2 (or whenever 2.7.3 goes final) at
which time we'll release Lift 0.10 and start on the Lift 1.0-SNAPSHOT
version.  We're expecting to ship Lift 1.0 on the 2 year anniversary of the
project.


>
>
> alex
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 3:29 AM, Mateusz Fiołka 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> If Maybe should be not used because of possible name clash in Scala
>> library then how about considering synonyms: Possible and Perhaps?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Caoyuan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> and "Pack" ?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Marc Boschma 
>>> <[email protected]<marc%[email protected]>>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I know David has resigned to keeping 'Can', but wouldn't 'Jar' be an
>>> > alternative? That way Empty and Full still make sense...
>>> >
>>> > Initially I thought 'Tin' sounded better but I recognise that term
>>> > wouldn't be as universal.
>>> >
>>> > Marc
>>> >
>>> > On 26/12/2008, at 4:14 AM, Michael Campbell wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> David Pollak wrote:
>>> >>> Folks,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Over the year that Lift has had Can[T] as a replacement for Scala's
>>> >>> Option[T], the name "Can" has required a lot of explaining.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> I've never liked "Can" as a name; always thinking that the opposite
>>> >> of one
>>> >> should be a "Can't".   I'm sure it's my own issue to solve, but it's
>>> >> cognitively dissonant to me.
>>> >>
>>> >> Any other container name works better for me, although of the ones
>>> >> you listed,
>>> >> I like "Box".
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Twitter:  http://twitter.com/campbellmichael
>>> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>


-- 
Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Collaborative Task Management http://much4.us
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Git some: http://github.com/dpp

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to