> From: Devon McCormick <[email protected]>
>
> I'm a big fan of naming things well but this particular boondoggle does not
> stir my passions either way.
>
> My feeling about the words is that a "fork" splits tasks apart but retains a
> central framework (i.e. wait for tasks to return) whereas "spawn" has the
> sense of letting offspring fend for themselves independently (i.e. return
> immediately to the parent).
Or... when there is a fork in the road and you part ways, you say good-bye;
but when you spawn you say hello, feed an input and expect an output.
Task has been out there and then part of J for ages. It has had a very well
documented scriptdoc which makes it clear which is which. It seems, the
belated confusion is a bit of stretch.
Since the Host foreigns are going to be replaced anyway, it is easier just
to provide the Unix equivalents to the existing Task verbs.
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Sherlock, Ric wrote:
>
> > > From: John Baker
> > >
> > > I use task all the time and would be irritated if it was changed
> > > without a
> > > sound rationale.
> >
> > Do you agree that the current terminology conflict between task.ijs & the
> > DOJ needs resolving?
> >
> > Would you be happy if an alias was created for "spawn" - say "host" and the
> > use of "spawn" was deprecated?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
