If a principle doesn't have a wikipedia page, it doesn't exist :) Seriously for a moment: Tossing the names of old programming language codgers about is an effective way to close off all discussion with your average non-language nut. The principle is simple enough, why do we have to complicate it with yet another dude's name? Sure, without knowing half a dictionary's worth of principles and theorems you keep reinventing the wheel, but in many ways that's the point of the exercise: As Mikael said: Java isn't anywhere near a functional language and trying to retrofit this in is a mistake. That's in fact what BGGA is trying to do, so if that's the goal, might as well just embrace BGGA and be done with it. We need to solve this problem in a way that fits nicely with the legacy, the syntax, and the geist of java programs and programmers.
On Jan 15, 10:20 pm, Ben Schulz <[email protected]> wrote: > Heh? Breaking out of/returning from within loops, I thought that's > what's being discussed?? > > Reinier: The second difference should be that "CICE violates Tennent's > Correspondence Principle while BGGA does not." That is not only more > concise, it is also more accurate. > > With kind regards > Ben > > On 15 Jan., 18:41, "John Nilsson" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Actually, what is the use case for long returns? What would you like to do > > with it? > > > The examples I can come up with is better solved with tail recursion... > > > BR, > > John --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
