|
|
Posted by Jerry Stuckle on 08/05/06 14:35
Gertjan Klein wrote:
> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
>
>>Tony Marston wrote:
>>
>>>The ability to have 3 different functions called readfile(), readFile() and
>>>ReadFile() causes problems.
>>>
>>>The ability to have 3 different variables called box, Box and BOX causes
>>>problems.
>>>
>>>Or am I the only person who can see this?
>>
>>Yep, you're the only person to see it, Tony. The rest of us are more
>>intelligent than that.
>
>
> Please don't speak for me (or qualify "the rest of us", next time). He
> is not the only one, and your disparaging comments don't make you look
> all that intelligent. Although I'm not as persistent in this thread as
> you and some others, I still largely agree with Tony that what he
> describes above causes more problems than it solves. Neither you nor I
> have any idea what the silent lurkers think.
>
Gertjan,
Fine. I really don't care what you think about me. My self esteem does
not depend on it. And I call stoopid asses like I see them.
I am completely tired of this one who keeps starting this argument. He
does it every three or four months - check the archives. And every time
he twists people's words, ignores valid counter arguments and doesn't
come up with any facts of his own. Just a stoopid troll.
I wouldn't say that about Tony if he came up with some valid arguments,
examples and had an intelligent conversation about it. But he doesn't.
>
>>BOX is a defined constant
>>Box is a class name
>>box is a variable name - an object of type Box
>
>
> Tony specifically described three *variables* called box, Box, and BOX.
> Not a constant, classname, and variable.
>
A perfect example of him twisting the meaning of other people's words,
or ignoring them completely.
As has been described many, many times in this thread. All three are
used in different contexts. But Tony tries to make them all one context.
> Using the same name, with different case, for related things, as you
> described above, is a sensible convention to do things -- in languages
> that can't distinguish these things in another way, and that are case
> sensitive. It does not mean that making a language case sensitive is a
> good thing in itself.
>
But Tony thinks a Class is the same as a CONSTANT is the same as a
variable. He just can't understand they are different things.
> I personally (slightly, not religiously) would prefer it if a language
> had other means to distinguish between classes, constants, variables,
> etc., rather than having to rely on programmers adhering to such
> conventions (I've seen too many that don't). This is a personal
> preference, to which I'm entitled, as you are to yours, obviously.
> Trying to make such a preference into a universal truth (as both you and
> Tony try to do) does not make a lot of sense to me.
>
> Gertjan.
Yes, you're entitled to your preferences. The difference is you're not
trying to force the rest of the world to follow your preferences.
As for a language which has other means to distinguish between classes,
constants, variable, etc. - PHP has some of that. The '$' is used to
indicate variables. Personally i don't like it.
In the projects I work on (both paid and open source), standards are
set. Programmers will follow those standards, or they will not be part
of the project.
I once had a highly paid programmer on a project who thought he was "too
good" for the project's standards. He was asked to follow them, then
warned by his manager. Unfortunately, he had to learn the hard way.
Interestingly enough, the project went better after he was let go then
while he was around.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|