Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions?

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by jamesemmott on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @06:10AM (#44508134)

This original sense of 'call' (deriving from the 'call number' used to organize books and other materials in physical libraries) was also responsible for the coinage of 'compiler', according to Grace Hopper: 'The reason it got called a compiler [around 1952] was that each subroutine was given a "call word", because the subroutines were in a library, and when you pull stuff out of a library you compile things. It's as simple as that.'

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by liotier on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @09:38AM (#44509915)

I just connected the dots... The identifier digits in the Dewey Decimal classification are called "call numbers" !

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by dmd on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @09:53AM (#44510071)

Yes, that's in the second paragraph of the article.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by debo_ on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @09:41PM (#44516410)

I took this to be a pun on "decimal" and "connecting the dots" but perhaps I'm just wired to see puns where they weren't necessarily intended.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by dotancohen on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @10:31PM (#44516655)

  > I'm just wired to see puns where they weren't necessarily intended.

I guess it keeps you grounded. Shocking how that works.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by OldfieldFund on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @12:31PM (#44511994)

I invoke them :]

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by tshaddox on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @02:13PM (#44513173)

Synonyms of "invoke" include "call forth" and "conjure up."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by QuercusMax on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @03:41PM (#44514018)

Or a "call sheet", which is the list of cast and crew needed for a particular film shoot

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by lo_zamoyski on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @03:50PM (#44514113)

The functional peeps even `apply` them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by hexasquid on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @10:18PM (#44516593)

I've never been quite sure when I'm applying data to a function, or applying a function to some data

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by dotancohen on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @10:24PM (#44516622)

Is the data changing or the function changing?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by odo1242 on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @11:18PM (#44516853)

In a functional language, neither

(though new data is created as a result of running the function, technically this is guaranteed to not affect the inputs due to the function having to be pure)

(perhaps this is excessively pedantic)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by hexasquid on Thursday July 10, 2025 @12:43AM (#44517264)

let's just map pedantic->precise and call it a day :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by dotancohen on Thursday July 10, 2025 @07:46AM (#44519907)

When running the routine, is it typically the function that changes or the input data that changes?

If it's the same function running on different data, then you are applying the function to the data. If it's the same data running in a different function, then you are applying the data to the function.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by linguae on Thursday July 10, 2025 @01:34AM (#44517605)

This tripped me up last week when I was reading Futamura’s paper on partial evaluation (i .e., Futamura projections). I’m not used to the “apply” terminology for functions, even though I learned the lambda calculus in grad school over a decade ago.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by reverendsteveii on Thursday July 10, 2025 @10:05AM (#44521261)

to my mind the function has always been the definition of the process and the data what that process, well, applies to. so you apply the function to the data and get an output.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by inglor_cz on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @03:40PM (#44514007)

Same here, but I will say "a function call", not "a function invocation".

Invoking X sounds deliciously alchymistic, by the way.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by throwaway889900 on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @04:43PM (#44514545)

Shame we can't use `cast`, that's already being used for types. And `conjure` probably only works for object constructors.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by srgpqt on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @07:01PM (#44515589)

Erlang/Elixir use "cast" method name when sending messages to their GenServer actor processes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by borromakot on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @07:25PM (#44515733)

There are two terms.

* call - to send and await a reply * cast - to send and not await a reply

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by tristramb on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @05:33PM (#44514940)

And 'summon' is just used for demons.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by throwaway889900 on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @05:59PM (#44515132)

A keyword exclusively used for network calls, in particular microservices ahaahaha

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by Terr_ on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @10:13PM (#44516561)

AFAIK there isn't a wizardly joke programming language yet--perhaps that was considered redundant--but you can use "giving" and "taking" if you're a rock-star programmer. :P

https://codewithrockstar.com/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by reverendsteveii on Thursday July 10, 2025 @10:04AM (#44521246)

let's use conjure for method interactions and reify as a special case when that method is a constructor. the more this sounds like medieval alchemy the more I can get behind it, and I've already got misbehaving daemons

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by debo_ on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @09:40PM (#44516403)

I fondly remember blessing objects in perl.

https://perldoc.perl.org/functions/bless

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by no_wizard on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @11:41PM (#44516964)

I bind my functions before I apply them

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions? by 1vuio0pswjnm7 on Thursday July 10, 2025 @12:16PM (#44522635)

On the topic of peculiar terms used by software developers, where does "ship" come from.

[ Parent | on HN ]