Re: Concurrent MVars for Guile

[Ludovic Courtès]

Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> skribis:

> Andy Wingo <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> On Sat 14 Sep 2013 15:59, address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>
>>> It looks like a useful tool to me.
>>
>> FWIW I totally agree!
>>
>>> I don’t like the name “mvar” (“monadic variable”, I guess).  Perhaps
>>> “synchronized box”, or “transactional variable”, or...?  The downside of
>>> choosing another name is that people familiar with the concept won’t
>>> recognize it first-hand.
>>
>> I guess I can see this.  I prefer "box" to "variable" fwiw.  How about
>> "tbox"?  (The T for threadsafe or transactional or something; perhaps
>> this is a bad idea.)
>
> My preference would be to keep the "mvars" name, however imperfect,
> simply because many people in the neighboring Haskell community already
> know them as "mvars".

OK, I think that makes sense then (I’ve seen mvars mentioned in various
places in the meantime.)

Hopefully the manual will make it clear what this is about.  ;-)

Ludo’.