Posted by pwolanin on September 10, 2009 at 4:31pm
5 followers
| Project: | Bakery Single Sign-On System |
| Version: | 6.x-1.x-dev |
| Component: | Metaphor compliance |
| Category: | bug report |
| Priority: | normal |
| Assigned: | Unassigned |
| Status: | postponed |
Issue Summary
In the current code, if the cookie tastes bad, the code 'eats' it. This is poor metaphor compliance. I would expect that taste+ eat means that the cookie is good and the user is logged in while something like taste+ spit out, or taste+throw away represent the correct metaphor for a bad cookie and the user not getting logged in.
Comments
#1
#2
i suppose bad cookies could be burnt cookies...
#3
*crumble* the bad cookie
#4
crumble is not bad - it shoudl be a verb that implies rejection somehow - crumble, spit, destroy, trash, reject...
#5
toss, burn, compost, dogfood, vomit, birdfood, flush?
#6
I like the image of tossing the cookies best.
They are bad, my body rejects them.
#7
I don't really care what the metaphor is. #6 works but I altered some of the comments to remove references to eating.
And I assume #6 was for 6.x-dev.
#8
Metaphor compliance is not important as long as you don't want anybody else to be able to understand (and contribute to) the code! Personally I dislike the fact we have so many metaphors when normal words would do.
I notice in #7 we are using destroy in the comments to explain toss. Could we therefore use destroy throughout? I think toss is a bit of an americanism in this context.
#9
Makes sense to me.
I also agree that cutesy language in the code makes it harder to work on and we should consider a rewrite to get rid of all of the cutesy language.
#10
Related #953376: Removing cookie metaphors
and marking this postponed