> On Jul 1, 2016, at 8:57 AM, John McCall via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:41 PM, Xiaodi Wu <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:03 AM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> on Thu Jun 30 2016, John McCall <rjmccall-AT-apple.com >> <http://rjmccall-at-apple.com/>> wrote: >> >> >> On Jun 30, 2016, at 6:12 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >> >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> on Thu Jun 30 2016, Matthew Johnson <matthew-AT-anandabits.com >> >> <http://matthew-at-anandabits.com/> <http://matthew-at-anandabits.com/ >> >> <http://matthew-at-anandabits.com/>>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Sent from my iPad >> >>> >> > >> >>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 6:59 PM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution >> >>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 5:47 PM, James Berry <[email protected] >> >>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 4:05 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >> >>>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>>>>> on Thu Jun 30 2016, Erica Sadun <erica-AT-ericasadun.com >> >>>>>> <http://erica-at-ericasadun.com/>> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 4:41 PM, Dave Abrahams <[email protected] >> >>>>>>>> <mailto:[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." >> >>> >> >>> Counter: some words have more than one well established meaning when >> >>> used in different contexts. 'spacing' isn't too bad here (much better >> >>> than 'arraySpacing') but sticking to the term of art 'stride' would be >> >>> best IMO. As James mentioned, spacing implies empty space *between* >> >>> items whereas stride matches the meaning of this property *exactly* >> >>> (which is why it is the term of art). >> >>> >> >>> If a programmer can't distinguish between a 'stride' property on >> >>> MemoryLayout and the 'stride' function they probably have no business >> >>> doing anything which requires use of MemoryLayout in the first place. >> >> >> >> I don't believe that “stride” *is* the accepted term of art for this >> >> meaning. I never heard of the idea of types having an intrinsic >> >> “stride” until I arrived on the Swift project. That usage came from >> >> “strideof.” >> >> >> >> If you all swear up and down that you've been talking about “the stride >> >> of a type” for more than 2 years, I won't fight you on this. >> >> Otherwise... well, I still won't fight; I'm being crushed by an >> >> avalanche of bikesheds and I can't muster the energy ;->... but I'll >> >> forever be plagued by doubts about the name. >> > >> > As the person who originally picked "stride" here, I agree that I've never >> > heard of people talking about the "stride" of a type; people talk about >> > striding >> > over an array, and they talk about the size of one's stride, and that size >> > can be measured in bytes. That's all I was thinking. >> > >> > However, I was just picking a name for an internal implementation concept; >> > I did not expect it to be used in the standard library. >> > >> > I don't really like "spacing"; it sounds too much like a synonym for >> > "padding", >> > i.e. the amount of empty space between elements rather than the total >> > amount >> > of space for each element. But I don't mean to re-open wounds; if people >> > have settled on "spacing", have at it. >> >> Better names are always welcome if you can come up with one. >> >> FWIW, courtesy of the thesaurus, curated to eliminate clearly unsuitable >> words: >> breadth, dimension, expanse, interval, period, space, span, stretch, width >> >> Of these, span might be the most OK. > > Another thought is "arrayElementSize", or "sizeAsArrayElement", or > "sizeInArray". Somewhat verbose, though.
Ignore me; I should stop responding to things sent to my inbox before I read the rest of the thread. 'stride' sounds good to me. John.
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
