Posts: 510
Threads: 44
Joined: Aug 2007
This thread is a branch off
this post
bo198214 Wrote:As a side note:
I am not very happy with those person naming. I think we should stick to the following rules when naming results or ideas after persons (if you want to discuss this please open a new thread in the "General discussion" section)
I will make sure the next version of the FAQ/Ref includes more general names. Should we instead use the Mother/Grandmother/Daughter naming system? Or should we opt for just "left-associative" and "commutative" and leave it at that?
Posts: 1,631
Threads: 107
Joined: Aug 2007
andydude Wrote:This thread is a branch off this post
bo198214 Wrote:As a side note:
I am not very happy with those person naming. I think we should stick to the following rules when naming results or ideas after persons (if you want to discuss this please open a new thread in the "General discussion" section)
I will make sure the next version of the FAQ/Ref includes more general names. Should we instead use the Mother/Grandmother/Daughter naming system? Or should we opt for just "left-associative" and "commutative" and leave it at that?
I would prefer speaking names like "right-associative". However the particular words right- and left-associative have another different meaning.
Left-associative means a(bc)=b(ac) and Right-associative (ab)c=(ac)b.
So I would suggest to use the words "left-bracketed" or "right-bracketed" instead. However I dont know wether that is an acceptable word construction for a native English speaker.
