|
|
Posted by Tony Marston on 08/04/06 14:08
"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:RIGdnWmrU-y1bEzZnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Tony Marston wrote:
<snip>
>>>
>>>No, but programmer conventions are built around language rules, and take
>>>advantage of those rules.
>>
>>
>> I disagree. The convention of using different case to differentiate
>> between constants, variables, functions and methods grew about because of
>> a deficiency in the language. There was no rule in the language which
>> made such a convention obligatory.
>>
>
>
> How do you know - by your own admission you weren't using modern languages
> in the 1980's and early 1990's when most of these conventions were
> standardized.
This was a "programmer convention" not a "language rule" as stated by a
previous poster in this thread. The language in question did not have any
rules to differentiate between the use of constants, variables, functions
and methods, so a group of programmers created a convention. They are now
trying to make this "convention" into a "universal standard", which is
totally stupid as the reason behind ths "convention" simply does not exist
in other languages.
> I was - and it wasn't due to any deficiency in the language. Rather it
> was to take advantage of features of the language.
So you think that the ability to create three different functions called
readfile(), readFile() and ReadFile() is a good idea?
--
Tony Marston
http://www.tonymarston.net
http://www.radicore.org
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|