From: Rune Allnor <>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: Re: Error in MIN and MAX
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 00:12:49 -0700 (PDT)
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <>
References: <htrjji$34i$> <hts20o$vt$> 
	<htt5bg$fli$> <httm7f$14t$> 
	<httojr$f0t$> <> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: 1275289970 24994 (31 May 2010 07:12:50 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 07:12:50 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info:; posting-host=; 
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; 
	Trident/4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; 
	.NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 1.1.4322),gzip(gfe)
Xref: comp.soft-sys.matlab:640783

On 30 Mai, 23:00, dpb <> wrote:
> Rune Allnor wrote:
> > On 30 Mai, 15:16, dpb <> wrote:
> ...
> >> The min() and max() names are, while possibly could claim they always
> >> ought to be minx or miny or somesuch amplified naming convention no
> >> matter what seem perfectly reasonable to use as variable names.  And, of
> >> course, if one comes from Fortran (listening, Rune??? :) ) where
> >> function names and variable names are in different name spaces, it's
> >> perfectly permissible
> > So you are saying that it is not the programming language
> > but the programmer's experience that determinec what features
> > he will be allowed to use in his programs...?
> How do you get that from what I wrote?

Because you said "if one comes from Fortran [...] it permissible..."
but without stating what language you ara discussing. You have worked
with fortran, I have not. Indicating that you could use these
techniques in any other language, wheras I can not.

It's a ridiculous statement, so I wonder if you really mean it.

> > It is an incredibly powerful feature. Once one have tried it,
> > one will never go back.
> ...
> Yes, that is essentially the rule in resolution of Fortran generic
> function prototypes to the specific function call (believe it or not...
> :) ).  And, yes, it is quite a nice feature, agreed.

So they got one thing right. (When did that happen? From the outset
in the early '50s? Some time afterwards? Maybe after C++ demonstrated
the technique's power?

Too bad, then, that fortran sufferes from just about every other
weakness, flaw and blunder in the book.