[sldev] [META][AWG]log chat of AWG meeting Friday, Oct 5, 2007

Dzonatas dzonatas at dzonux.net
Tue Oct 9 15:59:32 PDT 2007


dirk husemann wrote:
> i'm still struggling with the master copy concept: is the scenario that
> you take some object with you to a "foreign" domain (i.e., you copy it
>   


I'm familiar with the concepts, but I tend to put new words to them 
because the older terms just confuse. I don't blame you to nail these down!

Side note to all:

One scheme I use a lot is to add standard prefixes and suffixes to 
words. Some have complained like "but but that [new] word is not in the 
dictionary," but technically it is not new and the dictionary would be 
humongous if it listed every possible combination of prefixes and 
suffixes onto root words.

One pet peeve I have is not to use "parent" or "child" unless one is 
truly refers to a human bonded relationship.  Also, I don't use the word 
"container" to describe objects being inside or outside one another. The 
confusion starts when ones starts to refer a "parent" object of another 
"object" that is actually "contained" in another object. Those kind of 
relationships can be simplified with "intra-" and "inter-".

For example, "intrassets" and "interassets".  You can probably see 
already how that saves some discussion on where assets are and how they 
are referenced or copied. One I combination I have used a lot is 
"intramodule" and "intermodule". Those simply show how modules 
communicate with each other. Of course, there always could be 
"extramodular" communication.

Those are pretty simple, I'll save for now my really in-depth created 
names that probably only mean something to me, like intratomization 
which is like rezzing and interatomorphics which is like polymorphed 
code being compile-time or run-time linked.

-- 
Power to Change the Void


More information about the SLDev mailing list