> > I don't know if it's a remnant.
> >
> > You may be doing property initialization and need to nail
> down scope:
> >
> > class Student {
> >
> > private var name:String
> >
> > function Student( name:String ) {
> > this.name = name;
> > }
> > }
>
> That's just bad coding. Don't use class variable names as argument
> names. It's not like you don't have a choice about it. ;)
Sorry, but I completly disagree. I think this is best practice.
The usage of this is obsolete in many cases but with "this" it is clear that
it is a member variable.
I also use ClassName.staticVarName to ensure that it is a static variable.
This kind of coding will be completly obsolute if IDEs support semantic
syntax highlighting to show difference between member- static and local
variables like it is already supported by the latest JDT.
Cheers,
Sönke
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
