December 18, 2004 Re: Rename ctor / dtor | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to David Medlock | Yo, >>>- PHP uses them??? Python uses __init__, so why not use init() ? >> Agreed, lets add it to the list of alternatives. > >That was tongue in cheek! PHP seems an odd animal to mimic for a systems language. They're still just english words, but PHP just proves that it kind-a makes sense to call the constructor and destructor 'construct' and 'destruct'. Not really mimicing a PHP language feature.. >I actually like the suggestion you made in the other thread >class() and ~class(), but its too late at this point. Yeah, I guess that's really the only thing "this" and "~this" have going for them: it was decided, so live with it :-S I had another reason though why "this" is a strange name for the constructor. One pro was that "this" had something to do with the creation of the object (be it vaguely). But for "static this", the static constructor, it doesn't make any sense, since there's no 'this' being initialised. Lionello. |
December 18, 2004 Re: Rename ctor / dtor | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Anders F Björklund | Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>
>>>> Somewhat late as the discussion has been had before. No changes were made then.
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you have any links to any interesting arguments, pro or contra?
>>
>>
>> Nah, I like the current naming :) (although I have no really strong opinions on this matter)
>
>
> Okay, so people wanted the naming to change before - and it didn't...
> And because it was left as it is then, that's the way it's gonna be ?
Well, people don't necessarily mean 'all'. I don't think enough people could agree on an better alternative. The fact that possibly most people on the NG might believe that there are better alternatives, don't mean that such an alternative got a major number of votes when measured up against no real need for change.
Lars Ivar Igesund
|
December 18, 2004 Re: Rename ctor / dtor | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Lars Ivar Igesund | Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> Well, people don't necessarily mean 'all'. I don't think enough people could agree on an better alternative. The fact that possibly most people on the NG might believe that there are better alternatives, don't mean that such an alternative got a major number of votes when measured up against no real need for change.
Fair enough... And there are enough other issues to address, I suppose.
--anders
|
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation