The Name of the Name

Allen Wirfs-Brock allen at wirfs-brock.com
Wed Aug 1 15:12:56 PDT 2012


I suspect we will get around to having some level of syntactic support for defining these things so I'm more concerned about how we talk about them (ie, the name of the language feature)  then I am about what what has to be typed in source code and possible source code name conflicts.

From that perspective, a fairly unusual noun that is unlike to be confused with application domain concepts would be ideal.

One possibility is :  moniker
Microsoft COM uses that term for a different but somewhat similar abstraction.  Other than that usage, which seems benign, moniker seems unlikely to carry other unwarranted technical implications. 

Consider:
  "A property key is either a string or a moniker"
   "If the key is a private moniker then then it isn't reflected by Object.getOwnPropertyNames"


Allen




On Aug 1, 2012, at 2:17 PM, Russell Leggett wrote:

> Symbol is not bad. I think people could use it for similar purposes as Ruby's symbols, but it might get a little confusing at the differences - not that it should stop us if we like the word.
> 
> Some other ideas:
> 
> Key, Signature (unforgeable), Token, Privilege
> 
> - Russ
> 
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 5:06 PM, François REMY <fremycompany_pub at yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Symbol could already be used by parsers and compilers. What about UniqueName?
> De : Rick Waldron
> Envoyé : 01/08/2012 22:34
> À : Mark S. Miller
> Cc : es-discuss
> Objet : Re: The Name of the Name
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, August 1, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
> 
>> I like it. +1.
>> 
> Symbol was on my short list but worried it was too similar to Name.
> 
> It seems less likely to conflict with extant code, but not by much.
> 
> +1 (but we can get weirder if we wanted to) 
>  
> Rick 
>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Kevin Reid <kpreid at google.com> wrote:
>>> Lisp precedent: Objects which are used to name things (that is, they
>>> are used as keys by identity), and may be not globally-named
>>> themselves, are called symbols.
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Mark S. Miller <erights at google.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Now that we have both private Names and unique Names, the general
>>>> category covering both is simply Names. Properties can therefore be
>>>> indexed by strings or Names. Strings are the ones consisting of a
>>>> sequence of characters that can typically be pronounced. Names are
>>>> anonymous identities.
>>>> 
>>>> In the real world, names and identities are distinct concepts, and
>>>> names are the one corresponding to a unique sequence of characters
>>>> that can be pronounced.
>>>> 
>>>> Is "Name" exactly the wrong name for a opaque unique identity
>>>> typically used to index a property? Is there a better term?
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> --MarkM
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> es-discuss mailing list
>>>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> --MarkM
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20120801/6468722f/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list