>Cetin,
>
>those definitions are no law of nature. They are man made. On can change, and changes are done all the time. Say VFP's .CAPTION='=' behaviour for an example.
>
>I'm not 100% sure but I think I can remember a thread where I argue the same about the way a lang defines it's math with you. It was about -2^2. For what I remember you choose the other way around to now arguing that the definition the lang is using is wrong. But I may be mistaken here.
>
>Anyway, it's not that I do not accept a definition, but this does not mean that one can not change some ridiculous
feature nobody makes use of - for obvious reasons. Or will you explain that you use this feature in the sense that you distinct names by there case? My point is that every definition may be changed. For what I know at least some C compilers offers a compiler switch to turn that rubbish of. It's only kept for some code obfuscating freaks that possibly might use it.
>A pain in the neck without any use.
>
>To the complaining (about the complaining)^n
>
>I will not complain any more about this.
>
>Agnes
You are mixing language definition with methods implementation.
I don't see something that is ridiculous and needs to change. I still don't know what we are discussing. If we are discussing case sensitivity in some languages and particularly in C# I would definitely disagree that C# should be case insensitive. It is defined as part of the language (you can find C# language definition here):
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vcsharp/aa336809.aspxThanks.
