Sam Liddicott píše v Út 12. 01. 2010 v 16:04 +0000:
> * Jiří Zárevúcky wrote, On 12/01/10 14:43: 
> > Sam Liddicott píše v Út 12. 01. 2010 v 07:25 +0000:
> >   
> > > Overloading could easily be supported with mandatory cname or csuffix 
> > > attributes; that an explicit name needs to be given for C is no reason 
> > > that it needs to be given for vala which could do regular overloading.
> > > 
> > > I think it ought to be supported.
> > > 
> > > Sam
> > > 
> > >     
> > 
> > That's a matter of opinion. If Vala supported it, people would start
> > using cnames like "lib_class_some_action", "lib_class_some_action2",
> > "lib_class_some_action3", etc. Overloading exists because people are
> > lazy, ain't that true? :) Even if they wouldn't, it would still make
> > things considerably messier IMO (I, for one, do like the way I can use
> > most C libraries without separate Vala docs or searching VAPI).
> >   
> The point is that although the user needs to come up with alternative
> names, vala doesn't need to use them, and so the official reason for
> not supporting overloading is nonsense.
> 

I think the official reason is actually "nobody has shown us it is worth
the trouble". I second that.

> You present a new reason, that users who are idiots, will chose
> idiotic names. Such users may do this anyway...
> > But anyway, if you really want it, you could just implement it and send
> > it to Jürg for approval.
> I've played that game before, and lost. There's no point in working on
> any feature if it is not in accordance with Jürg's vision for the
> language. 

Well.. I didn't succeed with string templates as well and they made
their way into Vala later on, even without my effort.
Opinions change, so I see the possibility of overloading being supported
in some distant future, whatever the form. Not that I need or support
it.

> > Just think whether you really need it. From my
> > POV, it's pointless.
> >   
> 
> I have my own reasons for distrusting it, how will overloading work
> with automatic type promotions, maybe at one instant the int value
> passed as an argument gets upgraded to a long int, but later someone
> overloads for int - your code now has a different code path without
> you expecting it, lets hope the new code path works like the old one.
> Of course the user should make it like that, but automatic type
> promotion and overloading worry me.
> 

See? All the trouble and so little to gain.

> But despite that, I find it useful. Who wants to keep repeating the
> type of an argument on the end of a function name? It's the last
> vestige of lpcszName type notation. Such information belongs in the
> computer and shown with nice markup.
> 

Fields with different type and function have different names. I don't
see anything wrong with that.

Try imaging overloaded variables. That would be SO wrong.  

> > BTW, please use a mail client that supports message threads. :)
> >   
> Sorry - stinkin pocket outlook :-(
> 

Ewww. Don't use that. You will die a horrible death.

> Sam


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Toto je digitálně podepsaná část zprávy

_______________________________________________
Vala-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list

Reply via email to