On Jun 2, 2013, at 3:49 AM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:48 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <m...@apple.com> wrote: > > On Jun 1, 2013, at 8:54 PM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: >> You guys obviously never wrote any Lisp code. > > Ummmmm, why do you think I suggested "Symbol"? > > On Jun 1, 2013, at 9:09 PM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: >> Seriously, if "Atomic" isn't jargon, Intern isn't either. > > Both are jargon. "Atom" and "Intern" in various forms are both used elsewhere > so will be relevant to people from some other technical communities. Neither > is completely obvious to the novice. > > > Overall, I don't think any of the names suggested on this thread are > sufficiently better to be worth the transition cost (including my own > suggestions of Symbol and Atom). > > Perhaps just adding a brief comment at the head of AtomicString.h to the > effect: > > "This class might have been named SymbolString, AtomString, or > InternedString, but we're sticking with AtomicString for historical reasons, > and since the former are not markedly superior to the latter. Further, the > term Atomic is not intended to be read as meaning 'atomic' in the sense of > synchronic."
Explaining the purpose and nature of the class in a comment would be fine. But discussing the alternate names not chosen, or what the name doesn't mean -- that doesn't seem like good comment material. Too meta. - Maciej
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
