On 11-05-06 09:58 PM, dm-list-haskell-cafe@scs.stanford.edu wrote:
At Fri, 06 May 2011 21:27:21 -0400, Mario Blažević wrote:
I'd been thinking about using the terms Source and Sink, but Source is very overloaded, and "SinkSource" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue or evoke a particularly helpful intuition. The SCC package happens to use Source and Sink names as well. They are used not for coroutines directly, but instead for references to coroutines of the appropriate type. Every consumer thus owns a Source from which it fetches its input, and that Source is always bound to another coroutine that yields those values through a Sink. Source and Sink are a passive handle to a Producer and Consumer. I may be subjective, but I find this use of the terms very fitting. You mean fitting for references to coroutines, or fitting for the replacement names for Enumerator/Iteratee?
The former, unfortunately. As I said, the most usual name for the Enumerator concept would be Generator. That term is already used in several languages to signify this kind of restricted coroutine. I'm not aware of any good alternative naming for Iteratee.