Ha :), I really think you've let the Can out of the Box by raising this thread. Don't we all get a vote? After reading all the threads - +1 Box
On 27/12/2008, at 10:06 AM, David Pollak wrote: > > > 2008/12/26 Alex Boisvert <boisv...@intalio.com> > 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 <mateusz.fio...@gmail.co > m> 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 <dcaoy...@gmail.com> wrote: > > and "Pack" ? > > On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Marc Boschma <marc > +lift...@boschma.cx> 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 liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
