Plateforme Level Extreme
Abonnement
Profil corporatif
Produits & Services
Support
Légal
English
The m. variable thing, the sequel
Message
De
16/12/2004 09:20:46
 
 
À
16/12/2004 07:54:35
Walter Meester
HoogkarspelPays-Bas
Information générale
Forum:
Visual FoxPro
Catégorie:
Codage, syntaxe et commandes
Versions des environnements
Database:
Visual FoxPro
Divers
Thread ID:
00969478
Message ID:
00969714
Vues:
49
>Hi Fabio,
>
>>This is not a religios issue.
>
>I think it is. Anytime someone who is trying to force somthing down someone else his/her throat without the overwhelming scientifical evidence can be classified as religion. The fact is that we all can produce valid VFP applications with one of the listed strategies. On that level there is no scientifical evidence.

I don't agree.

I do not want to be offensive:
- the fact that one what functions does not mean that it is exact
- as far as the religion and science, does not exist, is only of the categories in order to discriminate a level of knownledge.

Every thing that is not understood can justify with the words Magic or Religion.

>
>>As I have already said, I task that nobody can make to understand to someone some thing that cannot understand alone, is only one time speedup issue.
>
>I´m afraid I´m lost here... Could you refrase ?
>

As I have already said in other messages, I think that nobody can teach to someone a thing he cannot understand alone. When someone teach something at to an other person it can reduce the time of this process.

<snip>

>I´m much like you, having your own opinion and very strong in my believes. Nobody is going to convince me without hard rock evidence. Like you I might have ways of working that are unconventional and know more about VFPs internal workings than the average user here. When I hit a problem, I´m going to analyze the problem until I got the root of the problem, even up to the level of VFPs or the OSs internal workings.
>
>Fabio, In the short time I know you, I´ve raised a lot of respect for your bug tracking reports with in depth explanation of what is going wrong. I also respect your critisism on how some aspects of the VFP language works. However, this respect is lead by recognition on a scientifical background. In no way you can convince me (with all the respect I´ve of your technical writings) in matters that boil down to ´personal preference´.
>
>Walter,
>>Fabio

I don't want convince you.
Only, a logical proposition:
- you can think to all the correct programs that can be written with VFP,
and now divide this set with in that use m. those that do not use m.
VFPUniverse = VFPUniverseWithMDot U VFPUniverseWithoutMDot
In the VFPuniverseWithMDot all the programs they work,
while
in VFPuniverseWithoutMDot
- a part works,
- a part does not work
and
a part generates wrong outputs.

Fabio
Précédent
Suivant
Répondre
Fil
Voir

Click here to load this message in the networking platform