|
|
Posted by Tony Marston on 07/30/06 08:22
"Shelly" <sheldonlg.news@asap-consult.com> wrote in message
news:6NJyg.4549$gF6.1069@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "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.
Wrong! Those conventions are only used in those languages whch do not have
any other means to differentiate beween variables, constants, functions and
methods. Proper languages do not need such primtive conventions.
--
Tony Marston
http://www.tonymarston.net
http://www.radicore.org
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|