[concurrency-interest] Ops type names
Gregg Wonderly
gergg at cox.net
Tue Jan 15 11:06:17 EST 2008
Joshua Bloch wrote:
> Hi. I understand your desire consistency. That said, I was
> inconsistent "with my eyes open." Worse, I violated the norms in
> mathematics. When a mathematician speaks of a real-function, he speaks
> of the range (result type), irrespective of the domain. That said, when
> it comes to designing APIs, I like to take the nice, short names for the
> common cases, and I believe that the case of functions whose range and
> domain types are the same will predominate (whether it's int-to-int,
> long-to-long, or double-to-double). So, I stole the nice names for the
> common homogeneous function types.
Is there any useful readability gains from using more prepositional words like
"with" or "on" instead of "Op", as in
onInt( 42 ).onInt( doubleToInt( 45.0 ) )
or
withInt( 42 ).withInt( doubleToInt( 45.0 ) )
since "to" is already prepositional in english?
Gregg Wonderly
More information about the Concurrency-interest
mailing list