Re: Generics Question
- From: "Ben Voigt [C++ MVP]" <rbv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 10:21:35 -0600
"Barry Kelly" <barry.j.kelly@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:t444l3lvb2sv10k5iuqjdi3odvigkb3qig@xxxxxxxxxx
Scott M. wrote:
My questions have
been about the observable results, not the purpose or under the hood
benefits of generics. I am asking for academic reasons.
Then there's a direct logical contradiction in your position: your
questions are for the "reasons", but not the "purpose" - but the purpose
is the reason!
You're drawing equivalence where there is none:
His reasons (asserted to be academic) for studying generics need not be the
same as the language designers' purpose for providing generics, even if the
words "reasons" and "purpose" be synonyms.
-- Barry
--
http://barrkel.blogspot.com/
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Generics Question
- From: Barry Kelly
- Re: Generics Question
- References:
- Re: Generics Question
- From: Barry Kelly
- Re: Generics Question
- From: Scott M.
- Re: Generics Question
- From: Barry Kelly
- Re: Generics Question
- Prev by Date: RE: Experience hosting the CLR from native c++ ?
- Next by Date: Re: How to use file I/o codes with forms and controls codes
- Previous by thread: Re: Generics Question
- Next by thread: Re: Generics Question
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|