From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 27 Jun 93 08:26:06 GMT From: pipex!uknet!mucs!m1!bevan@uunet.uu.net (Stephen J Bevan) Subject: Re: Ada Operators in 9x Message-ID: List-Id: In article <9306261803.aa04612@Paris.ics.uci.edu> kanderso@liege.ICS.UCI.EDU (K enneth Anderson) writes: > Suppose you _meant_ to write "q := 35;" but instead hit the shift > key accidentally and wrote "Q := 35;" >Then you'd be doubly dumb. Once for declaring "q" and "Q" in the same >block and twice for being sloppy about typing. You can't really mean the latter. A person is "dumb" if they make a typing mistake? That's your inference, not my implication. Do you think it is a good idea to define "Q" and "q" in the same block? I think it is questionable, but I'd allow it a) do deal with "G" and "g" in Physics and b) for experienced programmers to make their own choice. However, once done, the onus is on the programmer to carefully make sure they don't slip up, hence if they conciously decide to do something dangerous and then don't take precautions, then yes, I think they are dumb.