Re: Boolean As a Top Level Name

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 05:58:35AM +0200, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
> * John M. Gamble <[email protected]> [2016-09-09 22:12]:
> > Technically it's math, but I suspect people would be more likely to use
> > the keyword 'boolean', or perhaps 'digital logic', when looking for
> > something like this.
> >
> > (For supporting evidence, the Wikipedia article on the Quine-McCluskey
> > algorithm nowhere uses 'math' in the current version of the article.)
> 
> But “mathematical” is the first non-stop-word besides “truth table” in
> the Wikipedia entry for “truth table”.
> 
> As for Boolean::Minimizer, I wouldn’t have the foggiest clue what that
> module might be about from the name of it. Even after your explanation,
> the foggiest clue is as much as I got. So I can’t really suggest better.
> I vaguely suspect it’ll turn to be something best put in Data::, but who
> knows.

I suppose there's a problem here in that without being aware of the
problem being solved then no module name is going to be helpful.

If I have understood correctly then Boolean::Minimizer would use
Algorithm::QuineMcCluskey, or the non-existent Algorithm::Espresso, for
example, to do the actual minimisation.  I don't think
Boolean::Minimizer is a bad name but, for what its worth, here are my
naming suggestions:

 - I would take the R off the end, to have Boolean::Minimize
 - The Logic namespace looks like a mess, but I think this module would
   fit better in there: Logic::Minimize
 - The correct spelling is Logic::Minimise

They are in order of preference, but I'd recommend the first two.

-- 
Paul Johnson - [email protected]
http://www.pjcj.net