Content deleted Content added
→Range with a negative: ok, not now |
|||
Line 115:
:Don't explain it, code should be self-explaining. Just don't use the same name twice. It is bad programming practice. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 14:07, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
::That's an interesting issue which has been widely debated. At one time I used to make all my variables unique (check my user name!), mainly because I hated searches that gave false hits, although I was inclined to also agree with the "bad programming practice" sentiment. But then namespaces became fashionable and I had to adapt, and now can't see a problem with similar things having the same name. [[User:Johnuniq|Johnuniq]] ([[User talk:Johnuniq|talk]]) 00:24, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
:::The problem is confusion, as I said. For the reader, it is an extra mental step to keep them apart. That is, if the reader realizes a difference. They are not always mentioned in each others vicinity. (About mental steps: after studying (not reading) I discovered that 'mcode' means message code. I do not see why it would not be like msgcode to be clear a day earlier). -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 09:17, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
==boolean==
| |||