> > Please stop taking my words to its letters.
>
> So we're supposed to actually guess what you really mean ???
That's what human does, otherwise you'll "Fail the Turing Test".
> >> Personally, I've seen many C++ programs with complex class designs
> >> where it definitely helps to consistently
Lie a écrit :
> On Jan 16, 9:23 pm, Bjoern Schliessmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Lie wrote:
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I used to systematically use it - like I've always systematically
used 'this' in C++ and Java.
>>> And that is what reduces readability.
>> IMHO not, IOPHO not.
(messed up references?)
Lie wrote:
> Please again, stop taking letters to the words
Please don't mix up followups.
Regards,
Björn
--
BOFH excuse #11:
magnetic interference from money/credit cards
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Jan 16, 9:23 pm, Bjoern Schliessmann wrote:
> Lie wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I used to systematically use it - like I've always systematically
> >> used 'this' in C++ and Java.
>
> > And that is what reduces readability.
>
> IMHO not, IOPHO not. This is the nth time (n >> 1) thi
Lie a écrit :
> On Jan 15, 9:00 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Lie a écrit :
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 7, 2:46 am, Bruno Desthuilliers
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Lie a écrit :
(snip)
> No, seriously it isn't Java habits only, most other languages wouldn't
> need ex
Lie wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I used to systematically use it - like I've always systematically
>> used 'this' in C++ and Java.
>
> And that is what reduces readability.
IMHO not, IOPHO not. This is the nth time (n >> 1) this discussion
comes up here. If I have learned one thing fr
On Jan 15, 9:00 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
> Lie a écrit :
>
>
>
> > On Jan 7, 2:46 am, Bruno Desthuilliers
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Lie a écrit :
>
> >>> On Jan 5, 5:40 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> > Shouldn't this be:
> > self.
Lie a écrit :
> On Jan 7, 2:46 am, Bruno Desthuilliers
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Lie a écrit :
>>
>>> On Jan 5, 5:40 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> Shouldn't this be:
> self.startLoc = start
> self.stopLoc = stop
Thanks! Of course it
On Jan 7, 2:46 am, Bruno Desthuilliers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lie a écrit :
>
> > On Jan 5, 5:40 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >>Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>
> >>>Shouldn't this be:
>
> >>>self.startLoc = start
> >>>self.stopLoc = stop
>
> >>Thanks! Of course it should. Old Java
On Jan 6, 2008 6:59 PM, Dan Bishop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My employer has us use the "m_" convention.
>
> I wonder why Bjarne made "this->" optional in the first place.
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
I think implicit this-> is somewhat more defensible. If 'th
On Jan 5, 4:53 am, Bjoern Schliessmann wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> >> self.startLoc = start
> >> self.stopLoc = stop
>
> > Thanks! Of course it should. Old Java habits die slowly.
>
> That's not really a Java habit. In Java and C++, personally I lik
On Jan 5, 2008 11:31 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> import tok
>
> class code:
> def __init__( self, start, stop ):
> startLoc = start
> stopLoc = stop
>
> class token(code):
> pass
>
Apart from the missing self, remember that the __init__(...) of the
base classes is no
Lie a écrit :
> On Jan 5, 5:40 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Shouldn't this be:
>>
>>>self.startLoc = start
>>>self.stopLoc = stop
>>
>>Thanks! Of course it should. Old Java habits die slowly.
>
>
> No, seriously it isn't Java habits only, most ot
On Jan 5, 5:40 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>
> > Shouldn't this be:
>
> > self.startLoc = start
> > self.stopLoc = stop
>
> Thanks! Of course it should. Old Java habits die slowly.
No, seriously it isn't Java habits only, most other languages wouldn't
need e
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>> self.startLoc = start
>> self.stopLoc = stop
>
> Thanks! Of course it should. Old Java habits die slowly.
That's not really a Java habit. In Java and C++, personally I like
to write
this.startLoc = start
this.stopLoc = stop
It
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> Shouldn't this be:
>
> self.startLoc = start
> self.stopLoc = stop
Thanks! Of course it should. Old Java habits die slowly.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Jan 5, 10:31 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ...
> class code:
> def __init__( self, start, stop ):
> startLoc = start
> stopLoc = stop
> ...
You've forgotten the explicit self.
def __init__( self, start, stop ):
self.startLoc = start
self.stopLoc = sto
-On [20080105 11:36], [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>class code:
>def __init__( self, start, stop ):
>startLoc = start
>stopLoc = stop
Shouldn't this be:
self.startLoc = start
self.stopLoc = stop
?
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven / asmodai
イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン
Working on parser for my language, I see that all classes (Token,
Production, Statement, ...) have one thing in common. They all
maintain start and stop positions in the source text. So it seems
logical to have them all inherit from a base class that defines those,
but this doesn't work:
import to
19 matches
Mail list logo
