Re: Naming Conventions?
Date: 24 Apr 2007 18:39:34 -0700
Message-ID: <1177465173.936109.16520_at_u32g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
[Quoted] On Apr 24, 12:17 pm, Marshall <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Also bad: using the "-info" suffix. *Everything* in the computer is
> info!
You have a very liberal usage of "info". I would say, for example, that a thread pool has state but I wouldn't call it info (or data).
It is not generally meaningful to communicate the state of parts of an abstract computational machine as data in order to be interpreted as info, unless that's done on the entire computational machine, including the state of all threads, registers, memory caches etc. Consider for example the problem of finding a consistent cut, particularly with multi-core processors, relaxed memory ordering models, lock free programming techniques, distributed computing etc.
Putting it another way, if we treat the state of a computational machine as data, that data can only reasonably be interpreted as representing the state of a computational machine! Received on Wed Apr 25 2007 - 03:39:34 CEST