> On Jun 30, 2016, at 5:47 PM, James Berry <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Jun 30, 2016, at 4:05 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> on Thu Jun 30 2016, Erica Sadun <erica-AT-ericasadun.com> wrote: >> >>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 4:41 PM, Dave Abrahams <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> I mentioned this in a comment on the gist already, but I'm really not >>>>> digging the "array" in `arraySpacing`. We've already moved from top-level >>>>> "stride" to "memory layout spacing," gaining plenty of clarity. I'm >>>>> skeptical that the "array" adds anything more. Moreover, it muddies the >>>>> waters by mentioning a specific type (Array) in a context where you're >>>>> querying the memory layout properties of another type. >>>> >>>> OK, I agree with that. If we have “alignment” rather than >>>> “defaultAlignment,” I suppose we can have plain “spacing.” >>> >>> No way to last-second sell you on interval rather than spacing? >> >> If you can explain why it's better. >> >>> // Returns the least possible interval between distinct instances of >>> /// `T` in memory. The result is always positive. >> >> For me, “interval” doesn't go with “size” and “alignment,” which are all >> about physical distances and locations. There are all kinds of >> “intervals,” e.g. time intervals. > > Hmm. Sounds like stride to me. stride or byteStride? > > James
FAQ: "Why aren't you using the obvious phrase `stride` for something that clearly returns the memory stride?" ANSWER: "As stride already has a well-established meaning in the standard library, this proposal changes the name to spacing, providing a simple but correct name that works well enough in its intended use. Measuring memory is sufficiently esoteric that we prefer to reserve `stride` for a more common use case." -- E
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
