On Tuesday, April 05, 2016 12:17:59 AM David Edmundson wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Sebastian Kügler <se...@kde.org> wrote: > > On Monday 04 April 2016 17:29:58 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > > On Montag, 4. April 2016 15:04:30 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote: > > > I'm not convinced performant is a word although it seems to be used > > > for computer jargon > > > > > > http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/38945/what-is-wrong-with-the-> > > > > > wo > > > rd -performant > > > > It is clearly jargon. As Jens already said, the question is: Can we afford > > the jargon or not? We think we can, but there are certainly also good > > arguments against it. > > I don't like it. How about "nimble", it expresses power and speed in a > positively sounding adjective. > > What I like about "performant" is it doesn't just mean fast *. > It covers a broader range of metrics, and the text beneath it in Detail 3 > goes on about code quality and usability which "nimble" doesn't really > cover in itself. > > David > > *or at least it would if it was a proper word
I guess that's my gripe: If we create a vision, I'd really like it to be written in actually existing proper words, otherwise, that is the thing that distracts me from its meat. (And I guess others with language-OCD as well.) How about "agile"? (Already has connotations in context of software, and is overused...) Otherwise, we can also describe it "... performs well...". -- sebas http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org _______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
