Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!rutgers!modus!gear!am!alex
From: alex@am.sublink.org (Alex Martelli)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: POSIX bashing
Message-ID: <1991Apr12.203347.245@am.sublink.org>
Date: 12 Apr 91 20:33:47 GMT
References: <15621@smoke.brl.mil> <BZS.91Mar29171508@world.std.com> <CNH5730.91Mar30113957@maraba.tamu.edu> <127225@uunet.UU.NET> <1991Apr2.033339.17048@dg-rtp.dg.com> <19145@rpp386.cactus.org> <7021@segue.segue.com>
Organization: Premiata Famiglia Martelli & Figli
Lines: 44

jim@segue.segue.com (Jim Balter) writes:

:In article <19145@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) writes:
:>"-ant" is a suffix - check your Webster's.
:
:That doesn't mean that you can go adding it to any word willy-nilly.  An
:unabridged dictionary will list the accepted uses of a suffix with the main
:entries.
:
:>My says "one that performs or promotes (a specified action) <coolant>",
:>or "thing that is acted upon in (a specified manner) <inhalant>".
:>Another entry exists which says "performing (a specified action)
:><propellant>" or "promoting (a specified action or process) <expectorant>".
:
:Unlike "conformant", those words are all in the dictionary.  They also happen
:to be nouns, as is usually the case for new -ant words.  Not to worry, though,
:the language grows, and "conformant" will probably make it into a later
:edition.  Hopefully, though, the atrocious "prepend", which is used in place
:of "prefix" for no good reason and made it into the C Standard, will not.

According to Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged,
volume 1, p. 477: "conformant adj, obs: CONFORMING, CONFORMABLE".  Thus
not only is it an adjective, but it is marked as "obsolete" rather than
"a new -ant word"!  Also (volume 2, p. 1791) "pre-pend ... vt ...:
CONSIDER, PREMEDITATE <make jokes with malice ~ed - Charles Lamb>".
It's a variant of "per-pend", from Latin "perpendere", meaning "weigh
carefully in the mind, reflect on, PONDER<~ my words - Sir Walter
Scott>.  Thus, asserting that a programmer prepends a routine may be
correct, but asserting that she prepends an underline "to an
identifier" is probably wrong - the indirect object has no clear
meaning, and "considering" an underline, weighing it carefully in
the mind, and premeditating it as well, seems a bit of overkill...:-)

I like "conformant" - resurrecting obsolete words, as long as they do
have the right connotation, is a meritorious undertaking. "prepend",
on the other hand, definitely appears to deserve your choice of
adjectives when used in a meaning so far from Lamb's and Scott's usage. 
These are, of course, just opinions, but the unending fascination of
browsing through an unabridged is an undisputable FACT...:-)
-- 
Alex Martelli - (home snailmail:) v. Barontini 27, 40138 Bologna, ITALIA
Email: (work:) martelli@cadlab.sublink.org, (home:) alex@am.sublink.org
Phone: (work:) ++39 (51) 371099, (home:) ++39 (51) 250434; 
Fax: ++39 (51) 366964 (work only), Fidonet: 332/401.3 (home only).