Hi
On 16. Feb 2021, at 00:39, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 05:01:37PM -0600, Chris Muller wrote:
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 11:00 AM Eliot Miranda eliot.miranda@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree with this. Only certain processes are named. Including the destiny name of unnamed processes just introduces noise. By all means include the name of named processes, but please *don???t* add verbosity where it is unhelpful.
+1. You are so right. Assigning a *name* for human consumption establishes the intent of the human's desire to utilize its #name as the basis for its consumption. If specific identity distinction is needed, then set it as part of its name, but we should not include arbitrary attributes in its #printString. If such additional identity attributes are needed, they should be consumed by sending the appropriate messages from the appropriate places (UI).
Eliot and Chris both think that this was a bad idea. I don't understand the objection, but if no one speaks up in support of it, I will revert the merge in a day or two.
I'd like to retain the synthetic name. It certainly helps people like me who read and write with a voice in their head.
Best -Tobias