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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,TO_NO_BRKTS_FROM_MSSP
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e382b50ddc696050
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-07 09:04:58 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!hub1.nntpserver.com!news-out.spamkiller.net!propagator-la!news-in-la.newsfeeds.com!news-in.superfeed.net!newsranger.com!www.newsranger.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
From: Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com>
References: <3C0DB9D0.7184868A@acm.org>
 <smuP7.50028$xS6.82871@www.newsranger.com> <3C0EB851.77E7172A@boeing.com>
 <nLPP7.4018$Yy.271026@rwcrnsc53>
Subject: Re: List Strawman JC01
Message-ID: <KE6Q7.52969$xS6.87397@www.newsranger.com>
X-Abuse-Info: When contacting newsranger.com regarding abuse please
X-Abuse-Info: forward the entire news article including headers or
X-Abuse-Info: else we will not be able to process your request
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsranger.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 12:04:42 EST
Organization: http://www.newsranger.com
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:04:42 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17587
Date: 2001-12-07T17:04:42+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <nLPP7.4018$Yy.271026@rwcrnsc53>, Mark Lundquist says...
>        procedure Make_Empty (List : Lists.List);
>
>(although, that's a parameter that I would probably name "This")...

That's not *too* bad. After all, what you really want to say is that this is the
thing that is being made empty. Here I'd be apt to use something like "Target"
or "Subject" (or in a wierd mood, "Victim"). Those look better on the inside
than *this*. Yes, the outside code is more important, but someone has to
maintain the stuff on the inside of the routine too.

>> case, we're deliberately trying out different names to see which ones
>> cause the fewest people to barf.
>
>The imagination recoils... :-)  ("Right then... next name please!")

But it'd make a smashing Monty Python skit. :-)

Sort of a companion piece for the "Ministry of Silly Walks" skit...

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. 
However a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.