Re: Discuss changing the behaviour of append()
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Jun 12, 2014
- 4612 views
Ok, I see the reasoning.
But, I disagree - append() is wrong, not the code.
If you wanna another append(), it is yours choice and it is totally another story.
No, it's not another story, it's this story. The whole point of this thread is about that!
jimcbrown, append() worked as expected in that Derek's original wrong code.
It signalled about Derek's bug.
I'll rewrite your quotes as follows:
jimcbrown, append() worked as expected in that Derek's original code.
It signalled to Derek about something it couldn't handle.
Now that I've removed the loaded assumptions in your quotes, I'm happy to agree with you.
Derek's original code found a case that append() couldn't handle, and we want to replace append() with another append() that can handle this case.
Same as it worked 20 years in thousands of EU programs, without any claims from users.
Do you know just one claim?
There were probably bigger claims to deal with, like not being able to declare a variable in the middle of a function, or to assign a value to a variable upon declaration.
Derek had to use &, not append(). Period.
This is just flat out wrong. Technically, he could have used append(), even in a 2.4 compatible version of his function. It would have been more work, true, but it could be done.
And he do use & now, and his new function works ok (as he says) and looks good.
He never said that it looks good.
