|
|
Posted by Jerry Stuckle on 08/11/06 13:53
Tony Marston wrote:
> "Stan McCann" <me@stanmccann.us> wrote in message
> news:Xns981B9BFCBE33Bstanmccann@216.234.192.142...
>
>>"Tony Marston" <tony@NOSPAM.demon.co.uk> wrote in
>>news:ebf967$12s$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk:
>>
>>
>>>"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>news:zoGdnTyimMPRUETZnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>
>>>>Tony Marston wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Mark A. Boyd" <mblist@sanDotrr.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>>news:Xns9819C73F142DCmblistssanDotrrcom@66.75.164.119...
>>>>>
>>>
>>><snip>
>>
>>>Wrong! All I did was to say that the ability to do so was wrong and
>>>should therefore be removed from the language. I never said it was a
>>>good idea whose use should be encouraged. That argument came from
>>>other people.
>>
>>There is absolutely nothing wrong about it. As I said in my other
>>post, there could be perfectly valid reasons for doing so.
>
>
> You mean there is a valid reason for producing obfusacted and unmaintainable
> code? You mean the one about never being sacked becuase ou're irreplacable?
>
Only if we were to agree this creates obfusticated and unmaintainable
code. And we don't.
>
>>>>We use case intelligently. But that's obviously beyond your
>>>>capability to understand.
>>>
>>>If the language itself does not care what case is used for
>>>constants, variables, functions and methods then why should any
>>>programmer care? Any standards that insist on artificial constraints
>>>are bad standards,IMHO.
>>
>>As others have said, there are time honored standards in using case
>>sensitivity.
>
>
> Not universal standards which apply to *all* groups of programmers in *all*
> languages, merely a set of conventions used by *some programmers in *some*
> languages.
>
Nope. They're used by almost everyone except Tony Marston. Maybe
that's why you can't keep a job.
>
>>Any programmer that knows these standards can instantly
>>tell what type of variable he/she is looking at without having to go
>>through tons of code to find out. The same could be true with
>>functions based on the return value type.
>
>
> The use of mixed case is *not* the same as being sensitive to case.
> Languages like PHP allow you to define constants, variables and methods with
> exactly the same name and exactly the same case. It does not care that they
> have the same name because the are defined differently and referenced
> differently. The the that some programmers have difficulty with this and
> introduce personal conventions which insist that constants are all in
> uppercase, variables are all in lowercase and fumctions are all in mixed
> case does *not* make the language case sensitive. A constant is a constant
> regardless of case. A variable is a variable regardless of case. A function
> is a function regardless of case.
>
> You obviously have the wrong impression as to what *cae sensitive* actually
> means.
>
Not at all. I don't have my head up my ass like you do.
>
>>>If a programmer has difficulty in reading code because of a slight
>>>variation in case then he should get his eyes tested.
>>>
>>
>>There's nothing difficult about it. As I say above, there are
>>standards that actually help a programmer recognize the type of value.
>
>
> But in languages which do not need the use of different case to tell the
> difference between different types those standards are pretty pointless,
> aren't they?
>
Only to those without our heads up our asses, Tony. But you're too
stoopid to understand that.
Go away, troll. This is getting tiring. I prefer to discuss these
things with someone intelligent.
I have a pet rock with a higher IQ than yours.
I'm not going to bother with you any more, Tony. I have better things
to do - like take my dog for a walk.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|