Re: Generalized vs generic

[Mikael Djurfeldt]

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 08:34:13 +1100, Kevin Ryde <address@hidden> wrote:
> Mikael Djurfeldt <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > To me, the name "generalized_vector" feels a bit odd and heavy.
> > Looking in the dictionaries, it seems like the term "generic_vector"
> > would be more fitting. What do the native English speakers say?
> 
> I would steer clear of "generic", since it has a specific meaning for
> goops.

Well, to me that specific meaning---a function that can operate on any
of a set of types---is just another example of what we have here: a
vector that can be any of a set of types, so my view is that its just
an advantage to use the same term.

> Shortening to perhaps "general" would read fine to me.

But is it OK to keep generalized? Because if it is, then it would just
be silly to make any change.

M