library name incompatible with zombie reality

[alegscogs]

A headless browser should not be called 'zombie', because a zombie with no head is no longer a zombie, but just a dead body.

[tiegz]

+1

[cedric]

Couldn't one have a zombie with or without a head?

[fredbenenson]

 Github won't let me post in emoji.

[outoftime]

-1

[ccidral]

Makes sense but I like the name. We can think of it as soul-less or lifeless instead of headless.

[alegscogs]

Cedric brings up an interesting point. I was referring to the fact that, in most references, zombies are destroyed by damaging or removing their heads, but looking into it, there seems to be some support for the notion of a headless zombie.

[cainlevy]

But is a headless walking corpse a zombie, or simply reanimated? How can it be a zombie if it has no method for feasting on the brains of its own kind?

[ccidral]

@cainlevy I agree. As depicted by movies overtime it's generally accepted that zombies have their bodies functionally disabled when their heads get either "fatally" (in some way) wounded or cut off. Nevertheless I like the name.

[evanp]

You're safe when the zombie is headless.

[hughht5]

+1

[mattkatz]

Agreed. Rename library immediately.