The standard does *not* support - a removeAll: a - [was: Re: [BUG] Collection>>removeAll:]

Andrew C. Greenberg squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Fri Sep 13 00:27:40 UTC 2002


On Thursday, September 12, 2002, at 07:42 PM, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:

> I would like to go on record as saying that if you are a competent
> programmer who takes encapsulation seriously, there won't be any such
> thing as an "implied iteration" in code that is not intended to be
> thrown away soon.

Richard here raises the ante from one of a statement of a position to a 
marginalizing ad hominem against those who disagree with him.  Without 
disputing the amazingly over-argued position (with respect to which we 
should have long ago simply agreed to disagree), I observe that all 
evidence is to the contrary about this new escalation of the 
non-argument.  Few can argue that gang of four member Ralph Johnson and 
other luminaries who have written to the contrary are not "competent 
programmer[s] who takes encapsulation seriously."  Argument by 
marginalization should not be raised by those who would consider 
argumentum ad hominem to be problematic.




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list