From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-08 21:35:47
"Rob Stewart" <stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:200409040430.i844U9410532_at_lawrencewelk.systems.susq.com...
> From: "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]>
> >
> > > Sentence: "Sources, Sinks and their refinements are called
> > > resources."
> > >
> > > The term is overused in programming. Maybe "data resources"
> > > or "data-module" or so would be better.
> >
> > I know that 'resource' is a loaded term ;-) but I couldn't think of anything
> > better. 'Data-module' doesn't seem very descriptive. Unfortunately, the
standard
> > term seems to be "Source/Sink" -- which I find ugly.
>
> FWIW, I don't think "resource" captures the idea very well and I
> do agree that "source" and "sink" are rather technical, so they
> aren't so good, general purpose words. A term used for physical
> sources and sinks and, colloquially, for their drivers, is
> "device." Other choices: gadget, terminus, endpoint. Among
> these, I like "endpoint" best. It even captures the notion that
> they must be at one end or the other of a chain.
It seems there's not much support for the term 'resource', although it's come to
sound quite natural to me.
Of the various possibilities you mention, I think I like 'device' best. I'd
still want to keep source and sink for as names for input and output devices,
though, since they're the standard terms used by filtering libraries.
Jonathan