From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Naming FCRs Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 08:33:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87bl123k41.fsf@yahoo.com> <591A9AE3-3B90-4C15-BBC5-E2710EF89075@stanford.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kgi8cUx216SVsmrM" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="22771"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 27 08:34:13 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1n1kWL-0005kz-GR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 08:34:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58674 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n1kWJ-0005Rc-Gi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 02:34:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:52994) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n1kVI-0004Xl-EL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 02:33:08 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]:35850) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n1kVG-0000Er-CZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 02:33:08 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=qEcA1SRjzbJbjeoyFnwkZZp2ATbaKUZvx1HNbr+FWqU=; b=P/+vibq8rlP07sNkO0LcgnLfJ2 8iTby1L6BgzrwRlyqLgpj7xME8M9xMNu+/0QhuPOdRyoTAtm8Xak758ZJM6+RaY8JzVTCmOkJ6mqV 9XTBN6Yipmr6BApJCsigOWk+snDFj0eYEGJmJs1tcnyJTt2CCNKcg+Gx47oYQxARPgmFiUarwv+MF Wtnjjq/zIdjGkVkW47zOAZpIkRlEothTdTBFVddVQUIYdKSY52ImujTeKhzaAtw39mZ1p+odtYZ9M Q47gvkBgPLOLUdVyppZBCDKnwiiCz0DnEjMTvh7uXv/CvOrUz1Hw6qNLOIvZnBl1/BVXFAZEU5F98 kJZs0waA==; Original-Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1n1kVC-00038P-HR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 08:33:02 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:283401 Archived-At: --kgi8cUx216SVsmrM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 11:12:48PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: [...] > Bob Rogers [2021-12-26 19:46:39] wrote: > > Without looking at the code, this sounds more like a closure to me. >=20 > Right, I rarely distinguish "closures" from "functions", but indeed, > these are more closures in that their "heap object" characteristics are > made more visible. >=20 > > Since the slots are accessible outside the function, that would make it > > a "transparent closure" . . . but I like the internal dissonance of > > "open closure" better. ;-} >=20 > I like that, thank you. Happened to me, too... so I went out there trolling the tesauri in the Interwebs, specifically for "antonyms of closure". The net is weird, it has answers to such a crazy question. Loads of answers: Some which jumped at me for different reasons: - opening (too generic, but...) - continuation (not proposing that, it's taken, but... wow ;-) - disclosure (that one has a nice ring to it) - survival (nah, but... ;-) - preservation - continuance - continuity - introduction - can of worms (!) This isn't meant as direct proposals (in fact, the "continuation" flavoured ones are dangerous, since that has a clear, different connotation in Lispy worlds). It's rather meant as "inspiring material". The only direct candidate I somewhat like in that list would be "disclosure" -- I'd expect it to recall the association of "closure", helping the user's intuition. Like a closure, but you have access to some of its knobs from the outside. Cool idea, BTW :) Cheers [1] https://thesaurus.plus/antonyms/closure [2] https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/the-opposite-of/closure.html [3] https://www.powerthesaurus.org/closure/antonyms --=20 tom=C3=A1s --kgi8cUx216SVsmrM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQRp53liolZD6iXhAoIFyCz1etHaRgUCYclsJwAKCRAFyCz1etHa RubtAJ9oSM5pXtxqQSDKhdFqXwMviDJCewCeIIhfNwGJx9nkKCsVMGZF3FuVfN4= =g635 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --kgi8cUx216SVsmrM--