Re: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-svn] [gdalsnes] 18113:-reorderInsertXscendingOrder macro argument order and update uses

[Gunnar Dalsnes]

> >   Yes, but how
> > is this different from someone not knowing/understanding 
> >  that a finally block is called when returning from a try block? 
>  
>  
>  That's a compiler language feature. That's like saying that learning 
>  some 3rd party macro is equivalent to what operator new does in C++. 
The new operator is just a word as anything else. Just because its a 
compiler feature doesnt make it "magic". It just means that every C++ 
compiler should reserve and support it just like we can say ReactOS 
reserve and support Xxx for usage Xxx. And you can overload new u know. 
Then you never know what it _really_ does;-P

>    
>    
> I also learnt and remember English. But I
chose not to learn Zimbabwean.

It this context it would be "Zimbabwean sound so weird I refuse to learn 
it. Zimbabwean is flawed and ppl should stop speaking it. They should 
learn English instead so I can understand them."

>    
>    
> instead of having the cleanup code
quadriplicated.

At least we agree on something.

So then Im free to apply that schema thruout ros? Or will I then get: 
"gotos sux", "please dont do this", "it looks so ugly",
"i refuse to do 
it this way" etc?

>    
>   
> That's really a flawed statement. Learning and using these macros won't

> change their inner deficiencies as being flow control macros.

They are just as deficient as the goto example you showed ei. equivalent.

>   Learning 
>  and using them will just propagate a frowned-upon programming practice. 
Just because someone else says you should do so doesnt make it right. 
Thinking for urself (open mind) and not caring about what others says 
("the standard") can be a relief.

>   Your argument is much like saying "I'm sure
> if you all used 
>  uninitialized variables you'll like them". 
It depends. In Java they would;-P

>    
>>

G.