Ugh, why are there so many collections of qualities of that don't seem to have an overarching name? Makes talking about stuff really annoying. Currently thinking about:
? ::= abstract | concrete
? ::= definition | parameter
? ::= explicit | implicit
Conversation
Just thought of some things with names:
stage ::= runtime | compiletime
phase ::= static | dynamic
accessibility ::= public | private | protected
eval-strategy ::= strict | lazy
'stage' and 'phase' might be synonyms though…? 'eval-strategy' is a bit long…
Replying to
More things:
? ::= extrinsic | intrinsic
? ::= extensional | intensional
…had a recommendation for 'tensionality', but I'm not convinced haha - would prefer something more descriptive?
Quote Tweet
Replying to @brendanzab
Idk about the other ones, but I propose that the last one be called "plicity", and similarly for intensional/extensional it would be "tensionality"
2
Replying to
I like these! Not sure I understand the name phase but I don't have any better suggestions
1
1
I was thinking of the ‘phase distinction’ - seems like Luca Cardelli uses ‘phase’ to refer to ‘compiletime’ vs. ‘runtime’ in “Phase Distinctions in Type Theory”, however:
1
ah, but that runs into the same issue as "dynamism", etc etc, where it only describes one property, and "lazy" doesn't feel like a degree of eagerness
1
1
Show replies
ooh that's nice
1