[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SRFI naming



<evil-chuckle>

Alben Barkley Petrofsky <alben-barkley@petrofsky.org> writes:
> My shortnames proposal is along the same lines as that hypothetical
> proposal.  We take a large serially-numbered collection of somewhat
> related things, and extract a much smaller collection of more closely
> related things.  

OK, So how about I run a latent semantic analysis of the set of SRFI
documents and automatically assign names based on the emergent
clustering? (I actually have the code) This will produce better
results as we have a larger document collection so perhaps I should
wait until we get to SRFI-50. This will then also have the desired
side-effect of encouraging people to Write More SRFIs - when we get to
50, we get shortnames, which so many seem to want.

> The numbers used to distinguish among the members of
> the much smaller collection are much smaller numbers, and thus much
> easier to remember.  The smaller collection is distinguished from the
> rest of the larger collection by a non-numeric name.

I'd assign the in-cluster serial numbers based upon a distance mesaure
to the cluster centroid. This has the advantage that the most central
proposal gets the lowest number? 

Is this great or what?
</evil-chuckle>

david rush
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.12
GCS d? s-: a C++$ ULSAH+++$ P+(---) L++ E+++ W+(--) N++ K w(---) O++@
PS+++(--) PE(++) Y+ PGP !tv b+++ DI++ D+(--) e*(+++>+++) h---- r+++
z++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----