[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Proposal: allow @, $, !, and ? in Lua identifiers
- From: Sean Conner <sean@...>
- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:24:55 -0400
It was thus said that the Great steve donovan once stated:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Coroutines <coroutines@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I agree that documentation is
> > good, but I hate to expect it. I like function names that document
> > their use more than documentation that is well written.
>
> Ah... naming things. Very hard. We like to read longer names, fingers
> aren't so sure. (The verbal diarrhea of Java comes from easy
> auto-completion.)
The two hardest things in Computer Science are cache invalidation, naming,
and off-by-one errors.
-spc (D'oh!)
- References:
- Proposal: allow @, $, !, and ? in Lua identifiers, Coroutines
- Re: Proposal: allow @, $, !, and ? in Lua identifiers, steve donovan
- Re: Proposal: allow @, $, !, and ? in Lua identifiers, Coroutines
- Re: Proposal: allow @, $, !, and ? in Lua identifiers, steve donovan
- Prev by Date:
Proposals that didn't work (was Re: Proposal: allow @, $, !, and ? in Lua identifiers)
- Next by Date:
Re: Proposal: allow @, $, !, and ? in Lua identifiers
- Previous by thread:
Re: Proposal: allow @, $, !, and ? in Lua identifiers
- Next by thread:
Re: Proposal: allow @, $, !, and ? in Lua identifiers
- Index(es):