duck!

[so]

As "as" looks sweet, you have rather compelling points, "duck" sure grabs  
too much attention.

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 21:16:08 +0300, Walter Bright  
<newshound2 at digitalmars.com> wrote:

> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
>> Walter and you have the same convoluted brain, I can understand why he
>> instantly recognize it ;)
>
>
>
>> I already made my point, it make no sense to keep defending my position
>> since, evidently, is a pure subjective matter.
>
> It certainly is a glorious bikeshed.
>
>> I just think auto a_bird = duck!Bird(a_duck) is not obvious at all
>> compared to auto a_bird = adapt!Bird(a_duck). I even think adaptTo is
>> even cleaner, and I tend to hate long names, specially when camelCase is
>> involved, but since you didn't like it I, as others, suggested simply
>> adapt). If one could write auto a_bird = adapt!a_duck(Bird), adapt would
>> be as clear as adaptTo is with the current syntax. With adaptTo!Type you
>> even have the precedent of the to!Type template, so it seems like a nice
>> extension.
>
> Microsoft has a tradition of naming their products after what they do:  
> Windows, Word, Office, etc. It's obvious why they do it, and it works,  
> but it is just so generic and dull.
>
> Being the upstart language, D needs now and then something a little more  
> attention-getting than generic terms. The "duck" feature is important  
> for two reasons:
>
> 1. duck typing is all the rage now
>
> 2. being able to implement duck typing as a library feature (rather than  
> a language one) is a great demonstration of what D can do
>
> Label it "adaptTo" and few will even notice it. Label it "duck" and  
> people will click on the link to see what it does. It's important that  
> people notice that D has these things, and "duck" helps with that.
>
> I've been in this business a long time, and while you'd think that  
> programmers are above "what's in a name", we are just like everyone  
> else. A catchy name gets results. Borland, for example, added a trivial  
> and boring feature to their linker, called it "smart linking", and  
> managed to get an unbelievable amount of hoopla from the computer press  
> out of it. They did it again with another feature they called "zoom".
>
> Which blog article would you click on? "Interface Adapter for D" or  
> "Duck Typing for D"?
>
> "duck" is a great name for the feature. It's short & sweet, fits right  
> in with the popularity of duck typing, stands out, isn't boring, etc.  
> Heck, as proof, look at all the interest in this thread!!


-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/