>Peter,
>
>The comments weren't directed specifically at you, just for the thread in general.
Understood. However, for some readers (those who only read this all) it may have been confusing at times. I think it was not a classical case of hi-jack (by Dragan) though.
>Normally I give object parameters to functions/methods names like roForm, roCaller to signify and remind me they are references.
That is an original idea, but in my case it would interfere with the scope identifier.
>I also only rarely use parameters by reference and then it is only in the odd case where a function needs to "return" more than 1 value.
Here I see two paradigms possible.
1) The developer always takes care that a variable is passed by value, unless the functional design says otherwise.
2) The developer always takes care that the function/procedure/method never changes the parameter, unless the functional design says otherwise.
I do NOT use the first paradigm. I use the second one. Having said this I have to admit that I have not made this clear anywhere in my documentation.
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
