From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ebdc5ed511896a0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Keep slang words in describing Ada programming? (was: To Georg
	Bauhaus)
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.tsoh+bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
In-Reply-To: <RoxDi.68916$ax1.32636@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
References: <1188809249.040351.100160@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
	 <1188837355.753212.161150@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>
	 <SN1Di.488393$p47.360230@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
	 <46dcfc35$0$30383$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
	 <gFpDi.68355$ax1.48032@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
	 <46de7f99$0$4536$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
	 <RoxDi.68916$ax1.32636@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1189000213.2630.137.camel@kartoffel.vocalweb.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 15:50:13 +0200
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 05 Sep 2007 15:49:40 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 1d575a4b.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=kZTbG142f]0T2Rfi6<W9f5ic==]BZ:af>4Fo<]lROoR14nDHegD_]R5GoCaH<IU1E6N[W<lHX`=B4\6BhD5G6\i<`=WJChI2aP?
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:1753
Date: 2007-09-05T15:49:40+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 12:36 +0000, anon wrote:

>  since the original 
> poster in this case, used the word 'Generic' that means that if I change 
> the word it might confuse her.

Right, this is why I suggested that the confusion might
best be removed by mentioning the misunderstanding 
in your program or near it. Like, "you called it generic,
maybe because ..., but in Ada, generic means something
different. So it is better to not call it generic and
instead use ..."
(You would have used that other, correct, word in your
comment next to the access to subprogram type.)

This would have cleared up the situation for her and
for everyone else:

(a) She would have known that generic means something
    different in Ada. Now she would have to figure that out
    herself (if necessary), in part because your comment
    confirms her misleading use of the word. This might
    leave one task open that could easily have been closed.

(b) Everyone else would have said, Ah, I see. And
    presented more helpful pointers.


>   Plus, like all of us we use the 
> semantics and slang that we know and sometime it can be confusing
> to others, but to keep the peace we must all learn to get over that. 

It is a plus if you learn how to denote things not just using
slang but also using words that are slightly more formally correct.
That's one way of reducing confusion.