On 5/26/07 11:55 AM, "Joe Lewis Wilkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I admire in cleverness of all this, but the code is even worse to > comprehend than assembly language. Seems to me we're going backwards. > Can't we just keep things simple; like with put and get and > meaningful names? > > Seems to me we're defeating the whole purpose of Rev. Rev's purpose, as I see it, stops short of making it easy to use libraries of custom controls. The topic has come up on use-rev quite a few times, but it's never seemed easy or simple. Naming things is difficult. If you can simplify the logic and/or improve the names, please post your code. I'm all for simplicity and meaningful names. I just haven't seen a better way to serve this purpose. -- Dick _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
