Walter Meester
HoogkarspelPays-Bas
Mike Yearwood
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Hi mike,
>Everything has rules. We cannot write FOR BROWSE. You said we have to know how things work. I agree. I think the impact of putting the m. on the left side of an assignment is minor. The correct usage of it IMO is more important than the consistency, but I could live with making it consistent.
Well, If it is used consistently for every variable in every circumstance I certainly will feel much better.
>>I don't see any significant value in the performance advantages/disadvantages that apparantly exists and seem to differ from version to version. Though percentagewise they seem to be significant (i've measured about a 100% difference with wide tables) in absolute sense it does just not justify the use (maybe in very specific cases). I'm just not convinced any user could tell the difference.
>You are only avoiding the problem while you are in your own environment and you are giving up a little speed by holding to your personal preference.
Yes, I am in my own environment, that's true. OTOH, I have a problem with your statement "giving up a little speed" because this is insignificantly small in all but very exceptional cases.
>This IMO is like a smoker who won't quit despite evidence that it is bad.
I've got a little trouble in accepting you evidence:
1. We've not seen much usage of mdots in about all VFP sample code found in articles available.
2. There is a potential danger, but there are something you can do about it to avoid it.
3. If there is a chance of a conflic in fieldnames and variable names there probably is something wrong in either the field or variable naming.
4. If you can fix this, fix it.
5. If you can't fix this use m. in the cases to avoid the problem, preferably with a comment.
I don't see any major problem in this approach, nor do I have any problem with the approach of always using mdot.
To me the difference is all just personal preference. I choose not to use it, but don't have any problem with code standards who do use it.
>I for one am very dissappointed that this cannot be resolved reasonably.
I'm not sure what you mean by reasonably. Just accepting the mdot to be included in a VFP coding standard? I've got no objection against that. I've been merely saying that my personal preference is not to use it.
Walter,
Précédent
Suivant
Répondre
Voir le fil de ce thread
Voir le fil de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement
Voir tous les messages de ce thread
Voir tous les messages de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement
