<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><br></div><div>On Jan 5, 2015, at 9:00 PM, Chandler Carruth <<a href="mailto:chandlerc@gmail.com">chandlerc@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Chandler Carruth <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:chandlerc@gmail.com" target="_blank">chandlerc@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I'm probably weird, but I have two things in my head "No Op" which is just an abbreviation that I would write, well, as I did. Then there is a nop which is a single thing...</blockquote></div><br>Wow, I"m even self-inconsistent and have been merrily naming things 'Noop' as well. Best part of course is that these things *aren't noops*! Anyways, I'm really wondering whether this term is useful at all here....</div></div>
</div></blockquote><br><div>Yeah, I think it might just be the wrong term. </div><div><br></div><div>Of your other suggestions I like "stub" the best. Maybe "empty"?</div></body></html>