Re: Some naming questions

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-01 02:12:33

Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Hello,
> current V2 code has two kinds of targets. "abstract targets" such as 
> main-target, does not correspond to specific file, and can be generated with 
> different properties. "virtual-targets" correspond to specific file. The 
> naming does not represent the difference in a clear way -- "abstract" does 
> not tell that many variants can be produced, and "virtual" tells about some 
> impelementation detail.
>
> The same situation is in the docs -- which I'm tweaking at the moment. 
> Sometimes "target" refers to "main target", and sometimes to real file 
> target. What if we decide that targets which can produce different files when 
> generated with different properties are called "metatargets" and file targets 
> are called just "targets"? 

That sounds good to me.

> For now, this will affect only docs, but I hope 
> code will be changed, too?

That sounds bad to me. Code and docs must stay in synch or it will
be a nightmare.

> Second question. When writing docs, I find that the word "rule" does not make 
> much sense for a newcomer. I'd like to user more obvious "function" instead.
> Is this idea reasonable? I might cause a confusion by the time user finds that 
> syntax for declaring "function" starts with "rule" keyword, but at that time 
> he won't be a newbiew any more.

I suggest that we just hyperlink all uses of "rule" in the docs to a
little description.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com