|
|
Posted by Shelly on 07/29/06 11:05
"Tony Marston" <tony@NOSPAM.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:eaf8ft$8si$1$830fa17d@news.demon.co.uk...
>
> "Shelly" <sheldonlg.news@asap-consult.com> wrote in message
> news:Lsvyg.4249$gF6.1672@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>> "Tony Marston" <tony@NOSPAM.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:ead9b9$nf2$1$830fa79d@news.demon.co.uk...
>>> All I hear on this newsgroup is along the lines of "I have only been
>>> programming for 5 minutes and have only ever used one OS (unix) and one
>>> language (C or C++) and that is case-sensitive, so that's the way it
>>> is". Not much of an argument, is it?
>>
>> Well, I have been coding for 43 years, starting with spaghetti-code
>> Fortran. I like case sensitivity -- especially in Java where the casing
>> tells you what kind of thingee it is.
>
> That is only to cover up a deficiency in that language. In "proper"
> languages it is easy to distinguish between a variable and a function:
>
> - FOO is a variable whereas FOO() is a function.
> - or in PHP, $foo is a variable and foo() is a function.
>
> In neither of those examples does the language have any difficulty telling
> the difference between a variable and a function of the same name,nor does
> it insist that a particular case is used. Where programmers use different
> case it is purely a *programmer* convention and not a *language*
> convention.
In another post you listed the languages that you have used. Some of those
are not "general purpose" languages like Fortran, Cobol, C, Java, etc. It
seems that you have not worked in the modern languages so I believe that
your objection is part of the "you can't teach an old dog new tricks"
syndrome. IOW, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
The problem is that is "broke". What you say about FOO is correct.
However, when you get into more advanced concepts, such as in Java, please
tell me how I am to IMMEDIATELY differentiate between a method (function to
non-OO types) and a class, In Java it is:
thisString() --- a method
and
ThisString() --- a class
There is also the modifier "final" in Java that indicates that a named item
doesn't ever change. So, we can have declarations such as
int thisThing = 15;
and
final int THISTHING = 15;
The first defines a variable and initializes it to 15. The second declares
a constant as equal to 15. The person reading the code immediately knows
that THISTHING is a constant, even if he has not found yet where it was
declared.
I have learned over these 43 years with Fortran, Cobol, C, Java, DCL, html,
PHP, and many others that you should always write code that is very easy for
someone else to immediately understand and pick up to expand or debug. I
learned this through 11 years as a six-figure income consultant. I found
that as a byproduct I was the greatest beneficiary because I didn't have to
waste time months later trying to figure out why I did something a
particular way. It was clear and obvious. That is why I hated programmers
who fell into that "name that tune" syndrome and coded what should have been
in 5 lines in one line just to show off.
I see here a resistance to change which reminds me of a time around 1980. I
had written Fortran a particular way using Fortran 4. There was no
if-then-else construct. There were go tos -- hence spaghetti code. However,
people think in if-ten-else and not in goto. When I first encountered an
if-then-else I said to myself "wow! This is how I think, It makes for much
more readable code". Could I accomplish the same thing without that
construct? Yes! Did I say, why add this complication of a new way when the
"language doesn't require it"? No. It had advantages so I IMMEDIATELY
adopted it and virtually totally banished the goto from my vocabulary. Do
you see the parallel here? If Java were not case sensitive would it still
work? Yes. Is it essential to the language? No. Does it bring benefits?
Absolutely. Are there drawbacks? Yes. It forces "old dogs" to change
their warm and fuzzy habits.
Shelly
[Back to original message]
|