Re: PiL3: typos

[Lorenzo Donati <lorenzodonatibz@...>]

On 27/10/2013 16.57, Roberto Ierusalimschy wrote:

> I never undestood this term "memoize". This word did not exist in any
> dictionary; but, as far as I can undertand it, its meaning is exaclty
> the same of the word "memorize", which is a common word. So, why to
> create a new word when an old one was perfectly fit for the job? (The
> same seems to happen with "denotational" semantics versus
> "denotative" semantics.)
> 

That's the same feeling I had some years ago when I first heard of it
("memoizing"?!? Of course it _must_ be a typo! :-).

Alas, new terms get created and their usage sticks both in technical
speech and in common speech. Take the verb "to google" and all its
inflected forms (e.g. "googling around"). It is not even derived from an
English word (that would be "to goggle" = "to look with amazement"). Who
says "try searching it using a search engine" instead of "try googling
it" in common speech anymore? I bet we will find it in the Webster's
dictionary in 10 years from now.


> So, I used the term "memorize", which is old and good and means exactly
> what I wanted to say. In the title, however, I used the neologism, so
> that people looking for that technique could find it. I should probably
> have used "memorize" there, too.

Mmmh, probably it is too late to revert the process. The term is so
radicated that at most you'll get your most knowledgeable readers
scratching their head about why you didn't use the "right" term.

Maybe put a bolder statement as the first paragraph of sect.17.2 to
explain that you do this on purpose.


> 
> -- Roberto
> 
> 

-- Lorenzo

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments