Jon Pretty

I'm just finalizing the material for my http://Scala.one  Advanced Type Mechanics course, but all my examples use "foo", "bar" and "baz" and I want to use some less clichéd terms... What alternatives would you suggest? I'll give you credit if this ever makes it into a book!

Please, for us, mortals, in examples use names from some non-abstract domain to clearly see how they solve _real_ problems, and also please do not hide problems which they add, like: longer compilation time, dependent memory reads, mega-morphic virtual calls, etc.

It's not a matter of mortality, in this case: I'm trying to make a point with these particular examples on the typesystem that they're demonstrating universal properties which would apply to any method, parameter, type, etc.

There's a real downside to using more specific examples, in that people come to associate them with just that specific domain, and not like something universal. I've given meaningful names to the examples where I can. Now I just want some original names that don't infer context.

As for the other things you mention, these are all important, but they're not the primary focus of the course, and it's quite full already! But I'm certainly going to cover some compile-time performance characteristics.

Anyway, it will be wonderful course and you will complete work started by @ktosopl http://ktoso.github.io/scala-types-of-types/ … . I hope that next step will be a more advanced course that explains how types help to reach a mechanical sympathy (when hardware and software working together in harmony)