Talk:Function-operator overloading
Remove "schizophrenia" slang for Function-operator overloading
It's in poor taste to refer to function-operator overloading as "schizophrenia," especially because the linked article is for dissociative identity disorder, which is superficially related to schizophrenia. From a clinical perspective, schizophrenia is a very diverse condition that can manifest extremely differently on an individual basis. To perpetuate a misunderstanding of both schizophrenia and DID is tawdry and doesn't reflect well on the APL community.
If it must remain, there ought to be a reference to a prominent usage of the term. Even then, I still don't believe making this informal usage official by putting on the wiki article for function-operator overloading is at all appropriate; the term "function-operator overloading" is more than sufficient at describing the behavior. Matt (talk) 14:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
- The wiki should strive to describe common usage, and it is very common for APLers to informally use the term (or even "schizo"). I've added an explanatory note. Adám Brudzewsky (talk) 09:55, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Stumbled on this usage regarding ALGOL 58 by Alan Perlis: [1], bottom of page 143 and top of 144. So it's at least as old as 1978: much earlier than I expected!
- In my opinion, the usage of the term "schizophrenia" to refer to function-operator overloading adds nothing to the concept, or it's understanding and could be considered distasteful to some. I encourage removing it, despite it's common usage and historical precedence. User:Faun Locke (talk) 02:23, 26 10 2022 (UTC)
- If a modern reader of old papers stumbles upon the term, they might well seek an explanation in APL Wiki. We could possibly discourage the use as politically incorrect in today's age, e.g. by changing "sometimes" to "archaic epithet:" or similar. Adám Brudzewsky 18:43, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
- In my opinion, the usage of the term "schizophrenia" to refer to function-operator overloading adds nothing to the concept, or it's understanding and could be considered distasteful to some. I encourage removing it, despite it's common usage and historical precedence. User:Faun Locke (talk) 02:23, 26 10 2022 (UTC)