|
|
Posted by Shelly on 07/29/06 13:55
"Gertjan Klein" <gklein@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:5anmc2d5a53bmlll7ujia8sbu59vh2dr4t@4ax.com...
> Shelly wrote:
>
> [Snip a lot of comments I don't disagree with]
>
>>If Java were not case sensitive would it still
>>work? Yes. Is it essential to the language? No. Does it bring
>>benefits?
>>Absolutely.
>
> No, it does not. What you have described are conventions used in the
> case of symbols to make their "type" (constant, variable, function,
> whatever) clear. These conventions are useful for languages that have no
> other means to distinguish between these types. I've seen nobody
> disputing their usefulness. (Note that you can make a THISTHING that is
> not a constant, and a thisThing that is not a variable. The only meaning
> of the case used is in the programmer's mind.)
I **KNOW** they are only conventions, and they can be used by sloppy
programmers in the wrong manner, but they are conventions that are
universally followed by all professional programmers. Therein lies its
usefulness.
>
> The problem with case sensitive languages is that thisThing and
> THISTHING are entirely different. That means they can both exist at the
> same time. This can lead to problems in the hands of sloppy or c00l
> programmers. I see no benefit in having two "things" with the exact same
> name, differing only in case, meaning two entirely different things.
As I said "sloppy propgrammers". What is "c001"? I guess we will simply
have to agree to disagree. I see great value in this.
Shelly
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|