Subject: Re: [HACKERS] leakproof
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Returning to the original point, I've come to the conclusion that
> "pure" isn't the right way to go. The trouble with "leakproof" is
> that it doesn't point to what it is that's not leaking, which is
> information rather than memory, as many might imagine (and I did)
> without further hints. I'm not sure any single English word would
> be as descriptive as I'd like.

Discreet?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discreet

I guess the risk is that people would confuse it with "discrete".

-Kevin

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

(C)2011 mailinglist-archive.com