What is the definition of re-parent?
What is the definition of
parent, including: an ancestor, precursor, or progenitor.
Cause is derived from a source or origin.
What is a term that describes the change of the parent of a child object to a different source or cause? My first thought was “re-parent” or “reparent” but neither seem to be well accepted terms.
“Reparent” is the simplest word for computer programming and related fields. StackOverflow has a tag.
If @Nate makes it clear that reparent is “domain specific” as the “source” is to be provided without ui tag as an object in OP. As @Nate points out, reparent has a “domain-specific” sense sufficiently well established as to merit an SO tag. OED has these entries first recorded in the 70s… reparenting
Psychol (orig. 1964), 487 & 488… (and chiefly U.S.)).
Nouns: Any of various therapeutic techniques intended to treat emotional and psychological problems relating to parenting a person experienced as a child.Repent Psychol. (orig.) and “from god.” (from god.). (Restaurant) delegated by his or her own custom (and principally U.S.) to the United States.
verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb verb trans. verb ver. verb trans. verb verb trans. verb verb verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. verb trans. : To treat by a process of reparenting. cf. reparenting n., where appropriate.
What is obviously a totally different domain-specific sense (there may be others, I don’t know)?
But the point is that the most morphologically natural way to convey verb again is reverb. In OP’s context, reparent has to be the front-runner for a “generic” verb. It’s domain-specific senses (unknown to most native speakers) doesn’t impact its suitability for general use. Are these any kind of sensors purely natural (for example, it’s rare)?
If “accepted” is just a word, it doesn’t reference any fundamental concept that’s easily understood and useful in more general contexts. Does this confuse you? I can’t find any written instance of reparent more than 500 years old that aren’t presaging the physology usage. What do you mean?
