Re: nullable types is a struct ?
- From: "Peter Duniho" <NpOeStPeAdM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:53:47 -0700
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:45:35 -0700, Peter Morris <mrpmorrisNO@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm not saying it doesn't matter. I am just saying that I often type a bit vaguely when I think it's okay, and that the real meaning is easily inferred based on what has been said previously. Personally I didn't know that System.Nullable is a static class, I'm not pretending I knew, I've never used it. I just meant System.Nullable<T> and was being lazy when I typed :-)
Yes, but you called it a class, when System.Nullable<T> is a struct. There were two possible ways to interpret your statement, and neither interpretation could be converted into a correct statement.
I empathize with the tempatation to be lazy, but programming is a profession of intracacies and exactness. Heck, for that matter, most professions are when done properly. But in programming it's particularly important to be precise about what one says, because otherwise you may wind up saying something completely different from what's true. As you did in this particular case.
Barring being precise, one should at least be willing to accept a correction without expressing defensiveness. :p
Pete
.
- References:
- nullable types is a struct ?
- From: Tony Johansson
- Re: nullable types is a struct ?
- From: Peter Morris
- Re: nullable types is a struct ?
- From: Jon Skeet [C# MVP]
- Re: nullable types is a struct ?
- From: Peter Morris
- Re: nullable types is a struct ?
- From: Marc Gravell
- Re: nullable types is a struct ?
- From: Peter Morris
- nullable types is a struct ?
- Prev by Date: Re: FileSystemEventArgs, e.ChangeType enumeration
- Next by Date: Re: supplying my own business object to crystal reports basic[simple]
- Previous by thread: Re: nullable types is a struct ?
- Next by thread: Problem with Thread.Abort()
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
