Re: Boolean As a Top Level Name

On Sat, 2016-09-10 at 14:46 +0200, Paul Johnson wrote:
> 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.

Having followed this discussion (more or less, I have no clue what the
MiuneMcCluskey alorithm is), but I like Logic::Minimise

Lincoln