"to persist data"

[Lauren]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: techwr-l-bounces+lt34=csus.edu at lists.techwr-l.com 
> [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+lt34=csus.edu at lists.techwr-l.com] On 
> Behalf Of Peter Neilson
<...>
> I would venture that the correct wording should work 
> something like this:
> 
>   - The session persists the data. ==> The session uses 
> persistent data.

Er.  How does the data become persistent for the session to use it?

> 
>   - The program persists the between session data in files
>     in /tmp/pursistor. ==> The makes the data persistent by storing it
>     in /tmp/pursistor between sessions.

"Making data persistent" totally forgoes the fact the "persistent layer" is
used.  Things do not magically happen.  Data is persisted.  Plus "makes the
data persistent" uses too many words when the concept is "persists data." 

In this case there is a new definition of an old word and the verb is not
intransitive when it is used in the sense, "to persist data."  It is
transitive and similar to "to store data," but the vehicle by which the
application holds onto the data is different.

Is it really that troubling to grapple with a new definition of an old word?
Technology changes and those changes bring new concepts.  New concepts bring
new words and new uses for old words.  Why is this so difficult to
understand?  Was there this much discussion when developers began to add new
definitions and concepts to words like "views," "windows," "dump,"
"warehouse," "run," and a miriad of better terms to describe new definitions
of common word that I can't think of right now.

Lauren