Word to denote the exact behavior/functional logic of a widget?
I'm looking for a word for the following situation:
You have some sort of technical widget, e.g., a function in some programming library or some sort of interface on an appliance.
You want to describe the exact behavior of that widget, in general or in some particular instance. Perhaps you want to reference some particular fact about the behavior, or you just want to reference the general existence of a specification.
This word would be particularly useful where the widget solves a problem easily describable at a high level but the specific implementation could conceivably work in any of a variety of manners, and the choice of the exact behavior is a matter of convention.
Example sentences:
- "The
FOO
of this filter is that the whitelist overrides the blacklist, rather than the blacklist taking precedence over the whitelist." - "The
FOO
of this phone is that it will use Wi-Fi if available and fall back to cellular data, even if the cellular signal is stronger than the Wi-Fi signal." - "The
FOO
of all the regexp operators is to match greedily unless you add a '?' modifier." - "The
FOO
of the argparse library is to assume that two tokens starting with hyphens are two flags rather than a flag and the argument for the flag." - "Are the assumptions of function
f
compatible with theFOO
of functiong
? I see a few calls tog
beforef
in the main loop and I thinkg
has some side effects on the global state that could be relevant."
"Behavior", "functionality", "logic", "semantics", "specification", "guarantee(s)", and "protocol" all come to mind.
"Behavior" works for all of the above examples but it's pretty vague. "Functionality" is also vague and more appropriate for referring to the uses of some widget rather than the details of using it in practice.
"Logic" and "semantics" seem close to what I want; I think I've seen "logic" used in this sense and may have seen "semantics" used in the same sense, but "logic" is again very general and vague, and I think "semantics" might not quite fit (certainly the linguistic sense is completely different).
"Specification", "guarantees" and "protocol" are basically what I want but they're only really usable in particular cases. "Specification" works for describing the functionality as a whole but not for describing the behavior in a particular edge case. The same goes for "protocol" (and it's sometimes defined to only apply to communication between two widgets). "Guarantees" only works for limited cases (it's either wrong or awkward in the first 3). It also has connotations of desirability and I want a more neutral term.
This hypothetical word would find a lot of use in contract programming, but I don't see a perfect fit in any words used in that context, so perhaps it just doesn't exist :(.
single-word-requests technical programming
add a comment |
I'm looking for a word for the following situation:
You have some sort of technical widget, e.g., a function in some programming library or some sort of interface on an appliance.
You want to describe the exact behavior of that widget, in general or in some particular instance. Perhaps you want to reference some particular fact about the behavior, or you just want to reference the general existence of a specification.
This word would be particularly useful where the widget solves a problem easily describable at a high level but the specific implementation could conceivably work in any of a variety of manners, and the choice of the exact behavior is a matter of convention.
Example sentences:
- "The
FOO
of this filter is that the whitelist overrides the blacklist, rather than the blacklist taking precedence over the whitelist." - "The
FOO
of this phone is that it will use Wi-Fi if available and fall back to cellular data, even if the cellular signal is stronger than the Wi-Fi signal." - "The
FOO
of all the regexp operators is to match greedily unless you add a '?' modifier." - "The
FOO
of the argparse library is to assume that two tokens starting with hyphens are two flags rather than a flag and the argument for the flag." - "Are the assumptions of function
f
compatible with theFOO
of functiong
? I see a few calls tog
beforef
in the main loop and I thinkg
has some side effects on the global state that could be relevant."
"Behavior", "functionality", "logic", "semantics", "specification", "guarantee(s)", and "protocol" all come to mind.
"Behavior" works for all of the above examples but it's pretty vague. "Functionality" is also vague and more appropriate for referring to the uses of some widget rather than the details of using it in practice.
"Logic" and "semantics" seem close to what I want; I think I've seen "logic" used in this sense and may have seen "semantics" used in the same sense, but "logic" is again very general and vague, and I think "semantics" might not quite fit (certainly the linguistic sense is completely different).
"Specification", "guarantees" and "protocol" are basically what I want but they're only really usable in particular cases. "Specification" works for describing the functionality as a whole but not for describing the behavior in a particular edge case. The same goes for "protocol" (and it's sometimes defined to only apply to communication between two widgets). "Guarantees" only works for limited cases (it's either wrong or awkward in the first 3). It also has connotations of desirability and I want a more neutral term.
This hypothetical word would find a lot of use in contract programming, but I don't see a perfect fit in any words used in that context, so perhaps it just doesn't exist :(.
single-word-requests technical programming
add a comment |
I'm looking for a word for the following situation:
You have some sort of technical widget, e.g., a function in some programming library or some sort of interface on an appliance.
You want to describe the exact behavior of that widget, in general or in some particular instance. Perhaps you want to reference some particular fact about the behavior, or you just want to reference the general existence of a specification.
This word would be particularly useful where the widget solves a problem easily describable at a high level but the specific implementation could conceivably work in any of a variety of manners, and the choice of the exact behavior is a matter of convention.
Example sentences:
- "The
FOO
of this filter is that the whitelist overrides the blacklist, rather than the blacklist taking precedence over the whitelist." - "The
FOO
of this phone is that it will use Wi-Fi if available and fall back to cellular data, even if the cellular signal is stronger than the Wi-Fi signal." - "The
FOO
of all the regexp operators is to match greedily unless you add a '?' modifier." - "The
FOO
of the argparse library is to assume that two tokens starting with hyphens are two flags rather than a flag and the argument for the flag." - "Are the assumptions of function
f
compatible with theFOO
of functiong
? I see a few calls tog
beforef
in the main loop and I thinkg
has some side effects on the global state that could be relevant."
"Behavior", "functionality", "logic", "semantics", "specification", "guarantee(s)", and "protocol" all come to mind.
"Behavior" works for all of the above examples but it's pretty vague. "Functionality" is also vague and more appropriate for referring to the uses of some widget rather than the details of using it in practice.
"Logic" and "semantics" seem close to what I want; I think I've seen "logic" used in this sense and may have seen "semantics" used in the same sense, but "logic" is again very general and vague, and I think "semantics" might not quite fit (certainly the linguistic sense is completely different).
"Specification", "guarantees" and "protocol" are basically what I want but they're only really usable in particular cases. "Specification" works for describing the functionality as a whole but not for describing the behavior in a particular edge case. The same goes for "protocol" (and it's sometimes defined to only apply to communication between two widgets). "Guarantees" only works for limited cases (it's either wrong or awkward in the first 3). It also has connotations of desirability and I want a more neutral term.
This hypothetical word would find a lot of use in contract programming, but I don't see a perfect fit in any words used in that context, so perhaps it just doesn't exist :(.
single-word-requests technical programming
I'm looking for a word for the following situation:
You have some sort of technical widget, e.g., a function in some programming library or some sort of interface on an appliance.
You want to describe the exact behavior of that widget, in general or in some particular instance. Perhaps you want to reference some particular fact about the behavior, or you just want to reference the general existence of a specification.
This word would be particularly useful where the widget solves a problem easily describable at a high level but the specific implementation could conceivably work in any of a variety of manners, and the choice of the exact behavior is a matter of convention.
Example sentences:
- "The
FOO
of this filter is that the whitelist overrides the blacklist, rather than the blacklist taking precedence over the whitelist." - "The
FOO
of this phone is that it will use Wi-Fi if available and fall back to cellular data, even if the cellular signal is stronger than the Wi-Fi signal." - "The
FOO
of all the regexp operators is to match greedily unless you add a '?' modifier." - "The
FOO
of the argparse library is to assume that two tokens starting with hyphens are two flags rather than a flag and the argument for the flag." - "Are the assumptions of function
f
compatible with theFOO
of functiong
? I see a few calls tog
beforef
in the main loop and I thinkg
has some side effects on the global state that could be relevant."
"Behavior", "functionality", "logic", "semantics", "specification", "guarantee(s)", and "protocol" all come to mind.
"Behavior" works for all of the above examples but it's pretty vague. "Functionality" is also vague and more appropriate for referring to the uses of some widget rather than the details of using it in practice.
"Logic" and "semantics" seem close to what I want; I think I've seen "logic" used in this sense and may have seen "semantics" used in the same sense, but "logic" is again very general and vague, and I think "semantics" might not quite fit (certainly the linguistic sense is completely different).
"Specification", "guarantees" and "protocol" are basically what I want but they're only really usable in particular cases. "Specification" works for describing the functionality as a whole but not for describing the behavior in a particular edge case. The same goes for "protocol" (and it's sometimes defined to only apply to communication between two widgets). "Guarantees" only works for limited cases (it's either wrong or awkward in the first 3). It also has connotations of desirability and I want a more neutral term.
This hypothetical word would find a lot of use in contract programming, but I don't see a perfect fit in any words used in that context, so perhaps it just doesn't exist :(.
single-word-requests technical programming
single-word-requests technical programming
asked 1 min ago
dysonsfrogdysonsfrog
1212
1212
add a comment |
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f487554%2fword-to-denote-the-exact-behavior-functional-logic-of-a-widget%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f487554%2fword-to-denote-the-exact-behavior-functional-logic-of-a-widget%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown