[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