Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #72826
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: overuse of auto is dangerous |
| Date | 2020-04-05 14:15 +0200 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <r6ci4e$i56$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <r4l3fp$v13$1@dont-email.me> <87tv2pqm0i.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86imii6knh.fsf@linuxsc.com> <434bb7d9-7343-4894-96f6-705f96cb68b9@googlegroups.com> <86k12vni9t.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
On 04/04/2020 21:49, Tim Rentsch wrote: > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes: > >> On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 10:13:17 AM UTC-4, Tim Rentsch >> wrote: >> >>> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes: >> >> ... >> >>>> Good reasons for using a different name for the same parameter >>>> in a declaration and definition of a function? I can't think >>>> of any. >>> >>> Do you think it's possible that, for reasons of their own, >>> someone would deliberately choose to use a different name for >>> some function parameter where the function is declared, as >>> compared to where the function is defined, even though you can't >>> think of any good reason to do so? >> >> There's no inconsistency between that possibility and what Keith >> said; > > That is a true statement. > >> people often do things without having a good reason for doing >> them. > > That also is a true statement. > >> He also only said that he couldn't think of any good reasons > > Not exactly correct, but we can let that slide. > >> - that wording explicitly allows for the possibility of reasons he >> couldn't think of. > > Not correct. It implicitly allows for such a possibility, but not > explicitly. He wrote "I can't think of any" - that is explicit in stating the limitations of his first sentence. Implicit/explicit is not a binary choice, but a sliding scale, and I personally would judge Keith's wording to be towards the explicit end here. > >> In fact, his comment could even be interpreted as an invitation to >> enlighten him about what such reasons might be. > > Yes it could. His comment also could be interpreted as hinting that > he thinks there are no good reasons. I think it was obvious to most people from Keith's wording that he thought there could at least be reasons (for having different parameter names) that other people consider "good", even though he may be sceptical as to whether /he/ would consider them "good". > >> Can you so enlighten him? > > AFAIK he isn't seeking enlightenment, and I wouldn't presume to > suppose otherwise. I am not sure I believe you have this interpretation of what he wrote. I am wary of accusing you of lying here - that would be a step too far. But I think you are being deliberately misrepresentative. If you tell me I am incorrect here, I will accept that. I think it is obvious to most people that he /was/ looking for enlightenment - he was inviting anyone with knowledge or examples contrary to his experience, to share them. From past experience of your posts, it is likely that you will have knowledge of situations where people use different parameter names for reasons that they think are good. And it will many posts, dragged out over months, before you are persuaded to reveal any. > >> If not, there was really no point in responding. > > Your purposes are not my purposes. > James' purposes appear to me to be mainly about learning and spreading knowledge, discussing topics he finds interesting and enlightening, trying to improve the knowledge and understanding of C++ and programming amongst the followers of this group, and perhaps providing interest and entertainment for himself and others. What are your purposes here?
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
overuse of auto is dangerous jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2020-03-13 00:27 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-03-13 00:27 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-13 13:57 +1300
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2020-03-12 18:16 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-13 16:17 +1300
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2020-03-12 20:48 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2020-03-13 21:27 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2020-03-13 13:35 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-12 22:06 -0300
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2020-03-13 03:17 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2020-03-13 08:51 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2020-03-13 01:14 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-16 21:35 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-17 11:49 +1300
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-03-13 21:27 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-03-13 11:07 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-03-13 10:39 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-03-13 14:26 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2020-03-14 09:20 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2020-03-14 10:12 -0400
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-03-14 16:12 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-03-14 17:23 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-03-15 12:27 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-03-15 15:41 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-16 13:37 +1300
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-03-16 07:26 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2020-03-16 07:05 -0400
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-03-16 12:32 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2020-03-16 08:21 -0400
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-03-16 11:27 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-03-16 09:11 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-03-16 11:44 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-03-16 13:29 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2020-03-16 05:35 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-03-16 09:16 -0400
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-04-02 07:13 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-04-02 07:45 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-04-02 10:25 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-04-04 12:49 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-04-05 14:15 +0200
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2020-04-02 19:20 +0300
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-04-02 10:19 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-03-15 16:26 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2020-03-13 07:27 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-03-13 21:22 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-14 04:53 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2020-03-14 03:23 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-14 13:20 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2020-03-14 09:20 -0700
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2020-03-13 13:53 +0200
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2020-03-13 15:46 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2020-03-13 23:09 -0400
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-03-14 08:06 +0100
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-14 13:16 +0000
Re: overuse of auto is dangerous Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-03-16 15:31 +0100
csiph-web