From: tjholowaychuk <tjholoway...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 20:16:13 -0800 (PST)
Local: Thurs, Nov 8 2012 11:16 pm
No I mean how "foo()" within a class method may be another method
call, global function etc, extremely lame "feature"
On Nov 8, 7:58 am, Fredrik O <evoo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Most of you misses the point, it is sadly. Why it is preferred to have
> shorter code (as long it does not add any complexity) is it because it will
> make it easier to understand what is happening. That is the largest
> difference between a low level programming language and a high level
> programming language. It is the same thing when anyone type 1+1. It is
> indeed an abstraction and how it is implemented underneath can we just
> In my opinion it is indeed better to group methods close to each other. My
> - It forces the user to write code which can easily be highly optimized by
> - It can take multiple other compile options, so we can example add cache
> You most remember that if you create a mixin and when assign 10 different
> You does also a terrible mistake, even if an object has a set of methods,
> I assume when you taking about C++ ambiguous invocation you mean operator
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.