Re: Virgin tables

[Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@...>]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 14:30, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
> Dirk Laurie <dpl@sun.ac.za> writes:

> Could you choose another name for that concept?  I find the association
> of virginity with holes rather inappropriate.

The name is inappropriate, I second that.

> Also, there may be tables that have become externally as well as
> internally indistinguishable from virgin, even though they have had a
> history involving holes.

> So something like "linear" or, if you must, "pure" would seem more
> appropriate.

Um. If table has a hole, it is not a pure table? Looks weird.

Linear table seems to be more or less OK.

That being said, I believe that this subject of holes received too
much attention in the list lately.

Can we maybe discuss something more rational?

The problem is not with the language design (alternatives are worse,
as was discussed many times here), the problem is with user education.
Better to spend energy in that direction than to break lances about
the characteristic language feature that would not change in
foreseeable future.

Alexander.