Printable View
Sorry for asking this. Just confused a bit while naming interfaces.
Is it writeable or writable?
Is it closeable or closable?
How iteration, iterator become iterable? Not Iteratable <-- LoL weird
The next is method naming.
However,Is "iterator" a verb?Code:method == behaviour == verb
Is "value of" a verb?
Is "next" a verb??
I think "move next" is a verb.
Thank you.
Without going directly into your questions, I'm just going to give you general advice. English can be a very strange language and in many cases it doesn't follow a consistent set of rules... knowing it is simply that... you just have to know it. You learn it by seeing it, hearing it, and making mistakes... for all of these questions you can get a simple answer from a dictionary and I believe you should rather than asking here.
You'll find in many cases, there isn't necessarily a "why" when it comes to how a word is spelled or written.
That said, all I can tell you is that you seem to have a lot of confusion on what a verb is and probably it would be best to look up a simple lesson on verbs.
Writable.Quote:
Originally Posted by audinue
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by audinue
The root word is iterate. I strongly doubt that you could get away with either of iterable or iteratable.Quote:
Originally Posted by audinue
"Iterator" is a noun (and hey -- that's a data type after all). "Value" is a noun, and "of" is a preposition. "Next" is an adverb.Quote:
Originally Posted by audinue
Yes, languages are inexact, that's the hardest one to learn.
Thank you.
Don't worry, either one is close enough (but it's writeable and closable). The spelling here has to do with pronunciation and vowel sounds/rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by audinue
"next" is usually an adjective (something that applies a characteristic to a noun) and since "move next" here probably means move the next something, it's adjectival.Quote:
Originally Posted by tabstop
Adverbial use of next would be like in chess: "You move next." Sometimes next is part of a prepostion: "next to"
The verb form of "iterator" is iterate.
>> "next" is usually an adjective (something that applies a characteristic to a noun) and since "move next" here probably means move the next something, it's adjectival.
Grammer never was my strong point, but I'm pretty sure "next" is an adverb (and hence "move next" would be verb->adverb). Adjectives, on the other hand, describe nouns.
On a side note, the word "close" is a great example of the inconsistency of English.
[kloz] : the reverse of open
[klos] : near
Like a lot of common words next can be an adjective, adverb, preposition, or a noun itself. If you say "the next one", next is an adjective. If you say "we jump next" it is adverbial. I was interpreting audinue's (uncontextualized) statement in the context of programming, where it is most likely "move the next thing", wherein next is an adjective (it modifies the noun "thing"). If it was an instruction of the sort "subsequent to this, you move" it would be adverbial, but in most programming contexts there is no you because there is no other (and no "this" to be understood as subsequent to): the verb is applied to a noun, in this case, "next". So next is either a noun or an adjective there (as with programming languages that use "next" like C's "continue"; altho continue is a verb, these keywords have different spins IMO. It certainly cannot be an adverb there because that would be to say you are modifying the verb that continue represents, which you ain't).Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastiani
next - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
"close" is almost a homonym but actually a heteronym. These are common to all or most languages and have nothing in particular to do with the "inconsistency of English".
>> On a side note, the word "close" is a great example of the inconsistency of English.
Well we're still using a completely phonetic alphabet, homophones are always going to be hard.
It's actually a homograph - homophones have different spellings but the same pronunciation. And I would argue that English is hardly a phonetic language (whereas Spanish, for example, is almost completely phonetic).Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteflags
And the reason for this is that no one has dared do what the Italians, Spanish and French did: Rework the dictionary whilst not too many people could read/write, so that spelling and pronunciation matched up. Instead we have stupidities like read being able to rhyme with bead and red without changing it's spelling, and the town of Slough rhyming with cow, not tough or dough. And of course the river Thames and the herb thyme do pronounce the "th" as "t", which is not the case for other "th" in English (comes from their origin in Gaelic/Welsh).Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastiani
--
Mats
Probably because the latin-romance languages, being older, have more of a history with the alphabet. So they have adaptations like accents, which instead of accents in English, we use combinations of letters with particular rules ("ea", etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastiani
The English writing system is phonetic because we form proper spelling based on sounds and a few (almost unspoken) rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastiani
Whether the English language is phonetic should be even less of an argument compared to say ASL.
But other than that thanks for the correction.
It's a line from a Dr. Suess book. Pronunciation guide:
- tough
- analysis
- pronunciation
:p
Right. And we've adopted words from so many languages without much effort to normalize their spelling, which of course makes English one of the harder languages to learn. Come to think of it, you bloody Brits are responsible for this whole mess in the first place. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by matsp
:confused:
Hey now everyone knows French was the language of the "English" court and state for most of the last millenia? Where the written form would be official and standardized.
English itself was a vernacular with a much more heterogeneous background unlike most other European languages which had the advantage of (often multiple) state affiliations. That's probably why it ended up with such a large vocabulary and remains so "dynamic and flexible" today.
Damn, I should have looked that up. Like I said, grammer never was my strongest suit. :p Thanks for setting that straight.Quote:
Originally Posted by MK27
next can be either an adverb or an adjectiveQuote:
Originally Posted by Sebastiani
next move - adjective
move next - adverb
or even a verb - NEXT!!!
Thank you for your replies.
This is just awesome.
Or a noun or a preposition.Quote:
Originally Posted by abachler
No, in this case it is an adjective -- "move next (i)". I explained this already.Quote:
move next - adverb
That's a noun.Quote:
or even a verb - NEXT!!!