Re: Matt versus Chris
- Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Mar 13, 2009
- 1255 views
Derek, get your neglected dictionary and look up 'curmudgeon'. 'A crusty irascible cantankerous old person full of stubborn ideas'. -I don't like being called old twice in the same sentence ;)!
Um, actually I did. I wasn't sure of the spelling. Anyhow, according to http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/curmudgeon we find ...
curmudgeon (plural curmudgeons) 1. (archaic): A miser. 2. An ill-tempered (and frequently old) person full of stubborn ideas or opinions. Usage: "There's a cranky curmudgeon working at the hospital who gives all the patients and other doctors flak." "John Doe's old age and stubborn aversion to new ideas make him a curmudgeon of a candidate."
... one of these days I might try the forward referencing feature of the newer version again. I would let you know how it went.
Excellent and thank you.
And I do not think there was anything 'ambiguous' in my sentence about variable declarations. In my book, Derek, explicit variable declaration is type specification, not to be confused with variable assignment.
Ok, after re-reading your comments (many times), I think you are saying that it would be a good thing if coders could choose whether or not they have to declare variables at all. Hmmm... not so sure this a good idea. Declaration has more purposes than just associating a data type with the symbol. It can also give scope to it, which is fairly important. I'm sure you have heard all the pro/con arguments for this paradigm, so I won't bore you again. Maybe, it is possible to come up with a compromise, but that will have to wait for a future discussion.
