From: Borgerding, Mark A. (MarkAB_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-07-28 08:00:01
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Beman Dawes" <beman_at_[hidden]>
> "postulate" sounds a bit pompous. How about "require"?
"require" is an operator in Perl. I thinking avoid conflict when feasible
will minimize confusion. I'm not saying we should bend over backwards to
avoid all conflicts with other langs, but it should be considered.
Load in external functions from a library at runtime
More info can be found from "man perlmod".
The fact that "require" controls runtime behavior in Perl seems to
contradict the compile-time behavior we are proposing for C++.
The more I think about it, the more I like "postulate". It has only a
handful of meanings in mathematics -- and they are all pretty much correct
for the intended purpose. It also reads well as either a noun or a verb.
According to Webster:
Function: transitive verb
1 : DEMAND, CLAIM
2 a : to assume or claim as true, existent, or necessary :
depend upon or start from the postulate of b : to assume as a postulate or
axiom (as in logic or mathematics)
1 : a hypothesis advanced as an essential presupposition,
condition, or premise of a train of reasoning
2 : AXIOM 3
Along those lines, I also like any of these forms:
AXIOM( sizeof(int == 4 );
DEMAND( sizeof(int) == 4 );
PREMISE( sizeof(int) == 4 );
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk