Re: Protocols for Smashing the State

[Bill Richard <wjr>]

>From michael Mon Nov 13 06:52:01 1989
	Abstract: For once I argue for terseness.

	> From mark Mon Nov 13 04:53:48 1989
	> I don't at all like "merge".  What would be ideal would be a name 
	that
	> had the same relation to "union" that "+=" had to "+".  It'd be 
	great
	> if this turned into a general naming convention.  How about
	> 
	> void MuSet::unionInto (Set *)
	> 
	> with the "Into" suffix being the general convention?

	Good idea, but how about "To" as the general convention? 
	...
	("On" is awkward here, but might make sense even more often.  I 
	suspect
	 any particle will be awkward, though, since the normal way to name a
	 side-effecting operation is with a verb,
		michael

It probably doesn't generalize well but in light of Michael's  comment,
I can't resist suggesting "unionize" for this specific case.

--Bill