Re^4: Burned by precedence rules

It's not the "programming concept" that matters. (Whatever that ethereal phrase may mean to you?)

It is the wholly artificial distinction between "flow control" and whatever is the complement of that in this context?

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Comment on Re^4: Burned by precedence rules
Re^5: Burned by precedence rules by ikegami (Pope) on Dec 30, 2008 at 19:08 UTC
I make a whole lot of "wholly artificial distinctions". Most people call them "programming styles". Programing styles can be every shade of good and bad, but just pointing out it's a programming style isn't an argument.	[reply]
Re^6: Burned by precedence rules by BrowserUk (Pope) on Dec 30, 2008 at 22:03 UTC
Sorry. Did I suggest an argument with your choices somewhere? Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. "Too many [] have been sedated by an oppressive environment of political correctness and risk aversion."	[reply]
Re^7: Burned by precedence rules by ikegami (Pope) on Dec 30, 2008 at 23:21 UTC
I'm just wondering what's wrong with artificial distinctions. So much that it needs to be mentioned and highlighted.	[reply]
Re^8: Burned by precedence rules by BrowserUk (Pope) on Dec 31, 2008 at 01:19 UTC


The stupid question is the question not asked
	PerlMonks