phobos commit, revision 1531


user: rsinfu

msg:
Added AutoImplement to std.typecons.

http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/1531

Could we please rename AutoImplement to BlackHole? Then we can define WhiteHole to throw an exception out of any implementation.

Thanks,

Andrei

On 05/21/2010 07:10 PM, dsource.org wrote:
> phobos commit, revision 1531
>
>
> user: rsinfu
>
> msg:
> Added AutoImplement to std.typecons.
>
> http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/1531
>
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos

I now see AutoImplement allows injection of an arbitrary implementation, so it shouldn't be BlackHole.

Then I suggest aliasing BlackHole to a return-default AutoImplement instantiation and aliasing WhiteHole to an instantiation that always throws.


Andrei

On 05/22/2010 08:47 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Could we please rename AutoImplement to BlackHole? Then we can define WhiteHole to throw an exception out of any implementation.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andrei
>
> On 05/21/2010 07:10 PM, dsource.org wrote:
>> phobos commit, revision 1531
>>
>>
>> user: rsinfu
>>
>> msg:
>> Added AutoImplement to std.typecons.
>>
>> http://www.dsource.org/projects/phobos/changeset/1531
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos

Andrei Alexandrescu <andrei at erdani.com> wrote:
> I now see AutoImplement allows injection of an arbitrary implementation, so it shouldn't be BlackHole.
> 
> Then I suggest aliasing BlackHole to a return-default AutoImplement instantiation and aliasing WhiteHole to an instantiation that always throws.

Sure!  I just couldn't use the terms because I wanted to allow users to inject arbitrary implementation.  I'll add BlackHole and WhiteHole soon. Ah, I wonder why I couldn't think of alias!

Shin

Shin Fujishiro wrote:
>
> Sure!  I just couldn't use the terms because I wanted to allow users to inject arbitrary implementation.  I'll add BlackHole and WhiteHole soon. Ah, I wonder why I couldn't think of alias!
>
> 

I googled whitehole and blackhole and couldn't find any association with programming. Is the terminology correct? Are we inventing terms?

Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Shin Fujishiro wrote:
> >
> > Sure!  I just couldn't use the terms because I wanted to allow users to inject arbitrary implementation.  I'll add BlackHole and WhiteHole soon. Ah, I wonder why I couldn't think of alias!
> >
> > 
> 
> I googled whitehole and blackhole and couldn't find any association with programming. Is the terminology correct? Are we inventing terms?

Probably we are inventing terms.

I read a slideshow uploaded by Andrei which introduced "black holes" and "white holes" as models of auto-implemented classes. I borrowed the idea from there, so I'm following the original terminology.

Indeed, the terms are a bit too astronomy. And there should be more descriptions in the doc if these terms are used. But I'm not sure how to describe this... The mentioned slodeshow file seems already deleted, and I have no local copy.

Shin

I borrowed the terms from here:

http://search.cpan.org/~sburke/Class-BlackHole-0.04/lib/Class/BlackHole.pm

http://search.cpan.org/~mschwern/Class-WhiteHole-0.04/lib/Class/WhiteHole.pm


Andrei

On 05/22/2010 10:03 PM, Shin Fujishiro wrote:
> Walter Bright<walter at digitalmars.com>  wrote:
>>
>>
>> Shin Fujishiro wrote:
>>>
>>> Sure!  I just couldn't use the terms because I wanted to allow users to inject arbitrary implementation.  I'll add BlackHole and WhiteHole soon. Ah, I wonder why I couldn't think of alias!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I googled whitehole and blackhole and couldn't find any association with programming. Is the terminology correct? Are we inventing terms?
>
> Probably we are inventing terms.
>
> I read a slideshow uploaded by Andrei which introduced "black holes" and "white holes" as models of auto-implemented classes. I borrowed the idea from there, so I'm following the original terminology.
>
> Indeed, the terms are a bit too astronomy. And there should be more descriptions in the doc if these terms are used. But I'm not sure how to describe this... The mentioned slodeshow file seems already deleted, and I have no local copy.
>
> Shin
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos

I emailed the two authors asking them if they coined the terms or not. If they did, we should credit them.

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> I borrowed the terms from here:
>
> http://search.cpan.org/~sburke/Class-BlackHole-0.04/lib/Class/BlackHole.pm
>
>
> http://search.cpan.org/~mschwern/Class-WhiteHole-0.04/lib/Class/WhiteHole.pm
>
>
>
> Andrei
>
> On 05/22/2010 10:03 PM, Shin Fujishiro wrote:
>> Walter Bright<walter at digitalmars.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Shin Fujishiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sure!  I just couldn't use the terms because I wanted to allow
>>>> users to
>>>> inject arbitrary implementation.  I'll add BlackHole and WhiteHole
>>>> soon.
>>>> Ah, I wonder why I couldn't think of alias!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I googled whitehole and blackhole and couldn't find any association
>>> with
>>> programming. Is the terminology correct? Are we inventing terms?
>>
>> Probably we are inventing terms.
>>
>> I read a slideshow uploaded by Andrei which introduced "black holes" and "white holes" as models of auto-implemented classes. I borrowed the idea from there, so I'm following the original terminology.
>>
>> Indeed, the terms are a bit too astronomy. And there should be more descriptions in the doc if these terms are used. But I'm not sure how to describe this... The mentioned slodeshow file seems already deleted, and I have no local copy.
>>
>> Shin
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>
>

Great idea, thanks.

Andrei

On 05/23/2010 06:15 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> I emailed the two authors asking them if they coined the terms or not. If they did, we should credit them.
>
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> I borrowed the terms from here:
>>
>> http://search.cpan.org/~sburke/Class-BlackHole-0.04/lib/Class/BlackHole.pm
>>
>>
>> http://search.cpan.org/~mschwern/Class-WhiteHole-0.04/lib/Class/WhiteHole.pm
>>
>>
>>
>> Andrei
>>
>> On 05/22/2010 10:03 PM, Shin Fujishiro wrote:
>>> Walter Bright<walter at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Shin Fujishiro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure! I just couldn't use the terms because I wanted to allow users to
>>>>> inject arbitrary implementation. I'll add BlackHole and WhiteHole
>>>>> soon.
>>>>> Ah, I wonder why I couldn't think of alias!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I googled whitehole and blackhole and couldn't find any association
>>>> with
>>>> programming. Is the terminology correct? Are we inventing terms?
>>>
>>> Probably we are inventing terms.
>>>
>>> I read a slideshow uploaded by Andrei which introduced "black holes" and "white holes" as models of auto-implemented classes. I borrowed the idea from there, so I'm following the original terminology.
>>>
>>> Indeed, the terms are a bit too astronomy. And there should be more descriptions in the doc if these terms are used. But I'm not sure how to describe this... The mentioned slodeshow file seems already deleted, and I have no local copy.
>>>
>>> Shin
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> phobos mailing list
>>> phobos at puremagic.com
>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos