riks@csl.sony.co.jp (Rik Smoody) (01/10/90)
>In article <646@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu> eberard@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (Edward Berard) writ es: >>Jim Adcock has admonished me as follows: >> >> "Can you please choose some other descriptor rather than "ad >> hoc polymorphism" ??? This term is not descriptive, is being >> applied to a technique that is certainly *not* "ad hoc," and >> sounds like it is intended to be prejudicial terminology -- >> which I'm sure was not your intent!" My dictionary[1] did not surprise me: it defines "ad hoc" as "For a specific purpose, case, or situation". I'll acknowledge that SOME people are applying the term inaccurately, but several of the citations I saw here use the word quite descriptively. As to "prejudicial terminology": I don't think it's fair to put "ad hoc" in the same category with "communist", "intellectual", "interpreter", and "sexism", which I'm sure was not your intent. 8-/ "prejudicial" itself is a word with some loaded connotations... mostly bad. I hope you (Jim) don't mind that the world needs some "ad hoc" things. Each of us, even us robots, has our idiosyncrasies. [1] American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd College Edition Rik Fischer Smoody Sony Computer Science Lab, Inc., 3-14-13 Higashigotanda Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo 141 Japan (03)448-4380