I think Stephen was being intentionally sarcastic.. :)
At 12:30 PM 08/25/2010, you wrote: >On 8/25/10 6:30 AM, Stephen Russell wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 2:16 AM, Lew Schwartz<[email protected]> wrote: > >> ...and this is a bug because ....? > > ----------------- > > > > The compiler didn't catch it. That is a bug. > >VFP wasn't designed with static methods, so I don't see how you >think VFP's compiler >could catch it. It could warn that there's potentially a problem, >and it could catch >the case where you send too many parameters to a function (not sure, >but I bet it >already catches this), but it wouldn't be able to say for certain >that calling >DoDefault() with no parameters to a function that takes some >parameters is definitely >an error. > >Paul > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
