how to get an underscore character
stéphane ducasse
ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Sat Apr 29 07:38:10 UTC 2006
On 29 avr. 06, at 03:36, David T. Lewis wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 10:19:48AM -0700, Chris Muller wrote:
>> OTOH, Lint barks about methods with no timestamp. Maybe this is
>> an opportunity to "clean up" methods with no timestamp; i.e.,
>> since there isn't any reasonable historical information anyway,
>> this may be reason to put in a timestamp of the person running the
>> script (again, only for methods with no timestamp currently).
>
> No.
>
> Any method with a nil timestamp should left that way, or failing
> this should
> be attributed to the dawn of time, which appears to have been
> 1901-01-01
> in some unspecified time zone possible rooted in California, or
> perhaps in
> Greenwich, England. Personally, I think they should be left as nil,
> which
> retains the scope of the original ambiguity.
>
> What should absolutely positively not be done is to attibute the
> original
> methods to initials and time stamps other than those of the actual
> authors.
> This is not merely confusing, it is disrespectful of the original
> authors'
> work.
I agree but we could use SqC this way we could have better code that
does not have to check
for isNil...
Stef
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|