There are two computing topics that I spend a lot of time lecturing about: Unix and Objects.
I can not change the Unix terminology. Examples:
- I can not change the name of the kill command. [it has had that name for 30 years]
- I can not change the fact that killing processes is a frequent Unix operation.
- I can not alter the reality that you may have to kill children processes. [you must be a super-user to kill children that are not yours; you don't have permission to kill just any child]
- I can not eliminate the zombie process that is waiting for their parent to acknowledge their death.
- I cannot help it that the command to read manual pages is called man. [in today's politically correct society the command would be named person]
Unix terminology can get strange; especially if you objectize it (i.e. use object-oriented terms).
The power of object-oriented computing is that objects mirror real-world (understandable) objects.
Ideally, I should focus exclusively about computer related objects (they don't have to be real-world; they could be imaginary future computing objects). But computer objects can be complicated; therefore, real-world objects are used for some examples. The contractual nature of a class and class design practices dictate that I talk about corrupting objects (i.e. causing objects to take on invalid states). Examples:
- Create a
Personobject and kill it.
- Instantiate an
Airplaneobject and crash it.
- Destroy an object and subject it to garbage collection.
- Send spam messages to email objects.
- Transmit a shred instruction to an
When terminology gets weird, I like using The Jargon File.
Creator: Gerald Thurman (gdt)
Created: 06 Feb 2002