User model: terminology

[Kevin Bourrillion]

On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 8:44 AM Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

>  - A term for all non-identity classes.  (Previously, all classes had
> identity.)
>
> I've used the term "immediate", immediate object vs reference object.
>

Note that the temporal meaning (right now) is much much stronger in
people's minds than the spatial one ("immediately next to"). And this here
isn't even quite spatial. So for me, this doesn't work.


I believe that we should use a term that indicates that the object is
> composed of several values, a term like "compound", "composite" or perhaps
> "aggregate".
> I think i prefer compound due to its Latin root.
>

How strong do we think the parallels are with the Gamma et al "composite
pattern"? If strong, we should stick to "composite", and if not, maybe we
shouldn't, falling back on "compound".



> The other solution is instead of saying that it's non-terable by default,
> is to force users to always use a keyword to indicate the "atomiciy" state,
>

(I think that would be extremely unfortunate, though.)

-- 
Kevin Bourrillion | Java Librarian | Google, Inc. | kevinb at google.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/valhalla-spec-experts/attachments/20220504/eaf00a5d/attachment.htm>