The Importance of Terminology's Quality

[David Combs]

In article <rem-2008may08-005 at yahoo.com>,
Robert Maas, http://tinyurl.com/uh3t <usenet1.3.CalRobert at SpamGourmet.Com> wrote:
>> From: "xah... at gmail.com" <xah... at gmail.com>
>> the importance of naming of functions.
>

Lisp is *so* early a language (1960?), preceeded mainly only by Fortran (1957?)?,
and for sure the far-and-away the first as a platform for *so many* concepts
of computer-science, eg lexical vs dynamic ("special") variables, passing
*unnamed* functions as args (could Algol 60 also do something like that,
via something it maybe termed a "thunk"), maybe is still the only one
in which program and data have the same representation -- that it'd 
seem logical to use it's terminology in all languages.

>From C is the very nice distinction between "formal" and "actual" args.

And from algol-60, own and local -- own sure beats "static"!

And so on.


To me, it's too bad that that hacker-supreme (and certified genius)
Larry W. likes to make up his own terminology for Perl.  Sure makes
for a lot of otherwise-unnecessary pages in the various Perl texts,
as well as posts here.

Of course, a whole lot better his terminology than no language at all!


David