search

domenic / proposal-blocks

Former home of a proposal for a new syntactic construct for serializable blocks of JavaScript code
215 stars 5 forks source link

Better name #14

Open domenic opened 6 years ago

domenic commented 6 years ago

As noted in the readme, "blöcks" is a temporary name. What's the replacement?

Today Chip from TC39 gave a great suggestion: "code literals". I like it a lot.

YarnSphere commented 6 years ago

I like the idea behind "code literal", but I don't fancy the word "code" (sounds too abstract to me). I would prefer something like "module literal" but they don't seem like proper JS modules either (especially without top-level imports).

What about something like: "serializable block" or "pure block" (pure in the sense that code within cannot access outer state)? Unless, of course, you don't want to use the word "block" at all.

j-f1 commented 6 years ago

“source literal?”

js-choi commented 6 years ago

“Code literal” is nice. “Source literal” might be fine. There’s also “script literal”, “source-code literal”, “JavaScript literal”, “JS-code literal”, “block literal”, and probably many other possibilities.

mheiber commented 6 years ago

How about "Reifiable functions"? The name conveys what they do.

notlmn commented 6 years ago

"Transferrable worker functions", or just "Worker functions/literals".

EliHeller commented 6 years ago

Maybe “frames"

tomByrer commented 5 years ago

When I heard of "frictionless parallelism " I thought of using channel, since many devices can receive data via multiple channels to prevent congestion.

mgiuca commented 5 years ago

Why not "worker block"?

Or, "blerk" (alternative spelling: "blöck") for short. The worker created by using this is called a "web blerker".