"New FGL" naming survey

Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljenovic at gmail.com
Sat Jul 24 10:35:59 EDT 2010

For those interested, the overall results are in:

Ivan Miljenovic <ivan.miljenovic at gmail.com> writes:

> Thank you for all the people who have voted; we so far have 42 results
> in about 12 hours.
> Some indication of the results so far:
> * 62% prefer inductive-graphs
> * 62% have indicated that they use fgl or do some graph-related stuff
> (no correlation, just an interesting coincidence; I have not as yet
> done the number crunching to tell what the most popular name is for
> people that actually use fgl or other graph stuff).
> * Someone stated that ponies smell sweaty... not sure how that's
> relevant, but OK.
> * At least two people prefer the new name as it isn't an acronym (one
> because acronyms aren't needed and the term functional is redundant,
> the other because the term "graph" isn't directly in the package
> name).
> * Martin Erwig himself said that he thinks we should keep using the name "fgl".
> So, keep the votes coming in (I actually didn't expect this many already)!
> On 14 July 2010 00:24, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic <ivan.miljenovic at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Whether or not the new FGL that Thomas Bereknyei and I are working on
>> should keep the name was a semi-hot issue when we first mentioned the
>> fact that we were working on a new version about a month ago.  As such,
>> I've created a survey here to try and find out what the Haskell
>> community overall thinks we should call it:
>> https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dGpzMmFnUWY3Uktodk5wdHlLQk5kT1E6MA
>> More info can be found on the actual survey page.
>> --
>> Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
>> Ivan.Miljenovic at gmail.com
>> IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com

Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
Ivan.Miljenovic at gmail.com

More information about the Libraries mailing list