Re: Refactoring dynamic roots

[Marius Vollmer]

Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:

> Marius Vollmer wrote:
>> In my working copy, current input port etc are now fluids.  There is
>> no dynamic state that isn't a fluid.
>>
>
> Which reminds me of the one thought I had, namely globally replacing
> "dynamic-state" in your proposal by "fluid-state".  To my mind, this
> would have the advantage that it would be obvious that fluids were
> connected with the fluid-state.

Hmm.  Fluids are part of the dynamic state, and right now, they are
the only things in the dynamic state, so you have a point.  On the
other hand, there are also 'parameters' that are built on top of
fluids and provide an alternative interface, and thus, we could call
the dynamic state "parameter state"...

I am more comfortable just calling it the "dynamic state".

> (Alternatively, could change "make-fluid" etc. to "make-dynamic"; but
> I'm assuming that the term "fluid" is more established in the
> standards and literature - is this correct?)

There are many things called fluids, and they are mostly concerned
about simulating dynamic scope, I think.

> (In general, by the way, I'm very happy with this and your other
> recent proposals.)

Thanks!