John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Nick Ing-Simmons wrote:
>> Ed Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >There are many logical reasons for and against the RFC's here, but saying
>> >"it looks like c so it doesn't make it for me" is a weak argument at best.
>>
>> I don't think anyone made that argument - they have all been
>> "I hate that in ..." type comments.
>
>You forget... There have been numerous cases of people saying things like
>"that's what Python [or Java] calls those functions, so we should call
>them something else."
You may be right - though as I recall those were
"that's what X calls those functions, ours don't work the same so we should
call them something else"
My point was if experienced folk don't like something somewhere else
we should think twice before borrowing it.
The _names_ don't matter much at this stage - Larry can change them
but if "making things const like C++" is a bad idea then it is
a bad idea - A midden by any other name would smell as foul.
--
Nick Ing-Simmons
