At 15:45 2014-09-04, Dan Covill <[email protected]> wrote:
Gene,
Yes, the syntax rules for embedded comments may cause problems if
you don't follow them correctly, but how is that different from any
other part of a programming language?
Because it can cause nasty results. Statements that are
intended to be executable may be considered comments.
Fernando is correct; if it's documented and it works correctly as
specified, then it's not a bug.
No. Specifications can have bugs.
There is also the Law of Least Astonishment.
FWIW, in VFP 6 and 7 (don't remember about 8) that feature didn't
work - you couldn't put && comments on a continued line. So would
you rather gripe about having to be careful or gripe about not being
able to do it at all?
I believe I was using it with 6. I have been using that
pattern for a long time.
Documenting your file structure in-line has several advantages, the
price is subjecting your documentation to the command syntax
rules. I chose to document mine in a separate header section - I
never had execution problems but I've gotten bit by changing the
code and forgetting to change the documentation. In both cases, the
fault is ours and not VFP's.
Languages that make it too easy to make errors are not correct
in my eyes.
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
