on Thu Jun 30 2016, Matthew Johnson <matthew-AT-anandabits.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 8:12 PM, Dave Abrahams <dabrah...@apple.com> wrote: >> >> >> on Thu Jun 30 2016, Matthew Johnson <matthew-AT-anandabits.com >> <http://matthew-at-anandabits.com/>> wrote: >> > >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 6:59 PM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution >>>> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 5:47 PM, James Berry <jbe...@rogueorbit.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 4:05 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >>>>>> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: >>>>>> on Thu Jun 30 2016, Erica Sadun <erica-AT-ericasadun.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 4:41 PM, Dave Abrahams <dabrah...@apple.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> I mentioned this in a comment on the gist already, but I'm really not >>>>>>>>> digging the "array" in `arraySpacing`. We've already moved from >>>>>>>>> top-level >>>>>>>>> "stride" to "memory layout spacing," gaining plenty of clarity. I'm >>>>>>>>> skeptical that the "array" adds anything more. Moreover, it muddies >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> waters by mentioning a specific type (Array) in a context where you're >>>>>>>>> querying the memory layout properties of another type. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> OK, I agree with that. If we have “alignment” rather than >>>>>>>> “defaultAlignment,” I suppose we can have plain “spacing.” >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No way to last-second sell you on interval rather than spacing? >>>>>> >>>>>> If you can explain why it's better. >>>>>> >>>>>>> // Returns the least possible interval between distinct instances of >>>>>>> /// `T` in memory. The result is always positive. >>>>>> >>>>>> For me, “interval” doesn't go with “size” and “alignment,” which are all >>>>>> about physical distances and locations. There are all kinds of >>>>>> “intervals,” e.g. time intervals. >>>>> >>>>> Hmm. Sounds like stride to me. stride or byteStride? >>>>> >>>>> James >>>> >>>> FAQ: "Why aren't you using the obvious phrase `stride` for something that >>>> clearly >>>> returns the memory stride?" >>>> >>>> ANSWER: "As stride already has a well-established meaning in the standard >>>> library, >>>> this proposal changes the name to spacing, providing a simple but correct >>>> name that >>>> works well enough in its intended use. Measuring memory is sufficiently >>>> esoteric >>>> that we prefer to reserve `stride` for a more common use case." >>> >>> Counter: some words have more than one well established meaning when >>> used in different contexts. 'spacing' isn't too bad here (much better >>> than 'arraySpacing') but sticking to the term of art 'stride' would be >>> best IMO. As James mentioned, spacing implies empty space *between* >>> items whereas stride matches the meaning of this property *exactly* >>> (which is why it is the term of art). >>> >>> If a programmer can't distinguish between a 'stride' property on >>> MemoryLayout and the 'stride' function they probably have no business >>> doing anything which requires use of MemoryLayout in the first place. >> >> I don't believe that “stride” *is* the accepted term of art for this >> meaning. I never heard of the idea of types having an intrinsic >> “stride” until I arrived on the Swift project. That usage came from >> “strideof.” >> >> If you all swear up and down that you've been talking about “the stride >> of a type” for more than 2 years, I won't fight you on this. >> Otherwise... well, I still won't fight; I'm being crushed by an >> avalanche of bikesheds and I can't muster the energy ;->... but I'll >> forever be plagued by doubts about the name. > > I was just throwing in my 2 cents and planned to leave it at that. > The primary reason I chimed in is because I didn’t find the rationale > in the “answer” compelling. This isn’t something I feel like bike > shedding any further over either. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stride_of_an_array > > Maybe stride isn’t as common as I thought it was (if it was I’m sure > you would have heard of it before Swift) but it certainly predates > Swift in usage. But that's actually a different meaning altogether. Two “arrays” of type T can have different strides. They're talking about taking a view onto an underlying series of contiguous Ts that (potentially) skips over elements. -- Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
