to a point. but using grade school grammar just so the language illiterati can understand it - I have to disagree. just because something has been in the language less than 25 years doesn't mean it is either difficult or obscure in any way, it just means one hasn't invested the minimal time and effort required to keep up to date. I believe complacency is the word. I have yet to see any reference to anything in this 'new' feature debate about anything being obscured. the only gripe seems to be that these items didn't exist in the 1st run system manuals.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2005 12:01 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [U2] THE variable names In a message dated 7/16/2005 11:47:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > on another note - "when I see some of these new functions like REMOVE" - > 'new' ? > but that is really irrelevent, if one chooses not to use 'new' language > features, that's his/her choice. > but to advise others not to use them because it might confuse the oldtimers > is ludicrous. I disconcur. An intelligent programmer writes code so that other programmers have the easiest time modifying it. Not the hardest. Deliberately obfuscating code is a sign of pedantic obscuration. Will Johnson ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
