On Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 14:28:39 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 08:14:15 -0500, q66 <quake...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 00:54:54 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 03:05:37 -0500, q66 <quake...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Wednesday, 30 January 2013 at 03:02:38 UTC, deadalnix
wrote:
On Wednesday, 30 January 2013 at 00:26:11 UTC, q66 wrote:
It deeply disturbs me that people even take the original
post seriously.
Well, you may give some arguments instead of no, just no,
to convince people.
It just gives another meaning to foo.bar, and ENFORCING
camelCase by the language while lowercasing shit is just
horrible. Anyone with a slightest trace of language design
sense realizes that.
Apparently not the designers of objective-C.
-Steve
Not contradictory, Objective-C is not a well designed language
:)
Now we're just name calling ;) I tend to think that for the
most successful company in the business to standardize on it is
a pretty good testimony to it being well designed. I certainly
have grown fond of it, there are some really nice features in
it. But truly, xcode has played a large role in making the
language seem good.
As another option, what about changing my proposal so instead
of setX, it's set_x, and then casing concerns are eliminated?
I think C++.net does that.
-Steve
No, that is not a solution either. Any of these setBlah or
set_blah or whatever are ugly hacks. There should be explicit
property syntax. By explicit, I mean explicit - at least like
C#'s get/set stuff (and I don't really like C# either).
