In a message dated 9/18/2009 2:30:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, p...@ulmcnett.com writes:
John wrote: > I disagree with the last statement of easier to read. I've spent more time on this already than my interest level in it. If someone wants to pursue replacing isinstance() with "better" code that is more interface-based, then they can take this argument up with you. Paul _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users This message: _http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/4ab3d1bb.5080...@ulmcnett.com_ (http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/4ab3d1bb.5080...@ulmcnett.com) Just to chime in here... In my view, the more intuitively named the function, the better. I am not ready to pursue this myself, and perhaps the reason is partly due to the opacity and the longish learning curve. As a principle of linguistics, it is easier to say and understand "slushy snow" than "thing, type=precipitation, subtype=water, subsubtype=a little above freezing". All languages move in the direction of specialized terms. The more frequently used, the more likely a special name is applied. And, coming from VFP, which is DABO's best shot at a user base, the more VFP-ish the better. Josh Rubin --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/d29.4eaaac5f.37e52...@aol.com
