[bitc-dev] DISCUSS: Name That Type Class!

[David-Sarah Hopwood]

Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 16:08 +0100, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
>> Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
>>> We need decent names for these. My personal inclinations are:
>>>
>>>   ref-types => RefType?   (definitely remove plural, shift to word caps)
>>>   copy-compat => Compat?
>> Use 'Compatible'; the abbreviation sounds ugly.
> 
> Worth considering. My immediate thought is that "Compatible?" is long, a
> pain to type, and will create indentation challenges...

It's only 4 extra characters.

>>> but I have absolutely no useful thoughts for what to call
>>> top-copy-compat.
>> What is it intended to be useful for?
> 
> In practice, I don't expect most users to use it at all. It is needed
> internally by the complete inference system. This means that we need to
> be able to emit it in output, and therefore that we need to be able to
> re-admit it in input. So it needs a name.
> 
> Pragmatically, it shows up in some unusual cases where an inner type
> that is not mutation sensitive gets wrapped by a constructor.

If it is obscure enough that conciseness doesn't matter, I suggest
MutationInsensitivelyCompatible.

-- 
David-Sarah Hopwood