--- Wes Wannemacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-03-01 at 10:42 -0800, Dave Newton wrote:
> > --- Dale Newfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > [...] (and therefore none of us that still use emacs could possibly
> > > by good coders) [...]
> > Fixed your typo.
> Don't forget about tho
On Sat, 2008-03-01 at 10:42 -0800, Dave Newton wrote:
> --- Dale Newfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [...] (and therefore none of us that still use emacs could possibly
> > by good coders) [...]
>
> Fixed your typo.
>
> Dave
>
>
Don't forget about those of us using ed/cat/butterflies
htt
--- Dale Newfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] (and therefore none of us that still use emacs could possibly
> by good coders) [...]
Fixed your typo.
Dave
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional command
CleverSwine wrote:
auto-suggest IDEs...
The combination of your assumption that all "good coders" use IDEs (and
therefore none of us that still use vi could possibly by good coders),
continued posting about the same issue without any additional
contributions to the conversation (this would b
newton.dave wrote:
>
>>> One of the reasons people used the technique was to avoid a minimal
>>> amount of extra keystrokes. Java 5's static imports removed the need
>>> for the extra keystrokes.
>> I disagree.
>
> Go ahead. That's why people did it. There's no other reason to do it.
Did you
--- CleverSwine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Antonio Petrelli wrote:
> > Err... Does C++ have interfaces at all? All I recall is that C++ has
classes.
>
> Of course it does. A simple google search
>
(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=C%2B%2B+interfaces&btnG=Google+Search)
> would have shown you
