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
|