Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!ukc!its63b!db
From: db@its63b.ed.ac.uk (D Berry)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: Why ``Flavors'' ?
Message-ID: <1207@its63b.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 25 Apr 88 17:49:35 GMT
References: <359@aiva.ed.ac.uk>
Reply-To: db@itspna.ed.ac.uk (Dave Berry)
Organization: University of Edinburgh
Lines: 20

In article <359@aiva.ed.ac.uk>  writes:
>This use of
>"vanilla" is fairly general, and not confined to ice cream and object
>systems.  One might say, for example, "vanilla Common Lisp code" to
>describe some code that didn't contain anything tricky or particularly
>interesting.  So "vanilla" just means "ordinary".

This use of the word can cause confusion.  I was maintaining some code once
(I think it was vi) which included the comment "give the user a vanilla
terminal".  I didn't understand it, especially as I was into vanilla flavoured
cakes at the time (I mean really vanilla flavoured, not plain).

Moral: in technical writing, and comments, say what you mean in plain English
(not vanilla English ...).

By the LISPers use of the word, we would have vanilla flavour crisps.
What a concept.
-- 
"The answer is simple, they could do it with ease;
 stop attacking the patients, and attack the disease."	-- Tom Robinson.