[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: mh-e 6.2 imminent
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: mh-e 6.2 imminent |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Oct 2002 01:35:40 -0400 |
I've never heard of this `convention,' and indeed, it sounds kind of
dumb -- a `-flag' suffix doesn't really add any useful information
(if you know the _meaning_ of a variable, then you already know whether
it's boolean or not, and if you don't know the meaning, well, then it
hardly helps you to know that it's boolean!).
The idea of this convention is to make it easier to figure out the
precise meaning of the variable from its name. It would be a useful
convention if it were followed more consistently.
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), (continued)
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), Miles Bader, 2002/10/28
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), Richard Stallman, 2002/10/29
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), Miles Bader, 2002/10/28
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), Kim F. Storm, 2002/10/28
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), Miles Bader, 2002/10/28
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), Kim F. Storm, 2002/10/28
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), Henrik Enberg, 2002/10/29
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), Stefan Monnier, 2002/10/29
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), Richard Stallman, 2002/10/29
- Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent), Miles Bader, 2002/10/29
- Re: mh-e 6.2 imminent,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: mh-e 6.2 imminent, Miles Bader, 2002/10/25
- Re: mh-e 6.2 imminent, Richard Stallman, 2002/10/26
- Re: mh-e 6.2 imminent, Francesco Potorti`, 2002/10/29
- Re: mh-e 6.2 imminent, Peter S Galbraith, 2002/10/29
- Re: mh-e 6.2 imminent, Richard Stallman, 2002/10/30
- Re: mh-e 6.2 imminent, Miles Bader, 2002/10/29