alt Hacker NewsI don't take issue with the naming but with the names that feel a bit beyond my ken. "Erased" makes sense when explained but not before. "Reified" is a word I simply do not use so it feels like academia run amok.
Regardless, I recognize myself as the point of failure, but those names do strike me as academia speak, though better than some/many. <shrug>
Another shrug, but part of it is that the PL community (programming language community) is pretty deep into its own jargon that doesn’t have as much overlap as you might think, with other subfields of computer science.
People describe a type system as “not well-founded” or “unsound” and those are specific jabs at the axioms, and people talk about “system F” or “type erasure” or “reification”. Polymorphism can be “ad-hoc” or “parametric”, and type parameters can be invariant, covariant, and contravariant. It’s just a lot of jargon and I think the main reason it’s not intuitive to people outside the right fields is that the actual concepts are mostly unfamiliar.