🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <60SqRiBF3RB@herold.franken.de>, jhd@herold.franken.de says...
>
[snip]
>In my experience, such languages actually don't need HN; the compiler will  
>catch all errors that HN is supposed to help avoid. This is because in  
>these languages, the type of a variable or value precisely defines what  
>operations are admitted for it. If you had a type zero-terminated-string  
>in such a language, the compiler won't allow you to pass this to a routine  
>that expects a string with a length descriptor.

In general I agree (e.g., for Modula-3).  But if I am doing a binding for a 
library
originally HN-encoded, I'll use the same naming convention.  That makes
it more familiar to the typical programmer who may just be trying
out a "new language".  However, once I get past the initial call,
(e.g., for an object wrapper around those raw facilities), I go back
to non-HN style.

[snip]
>
>-Joachim

--------------------
Harry George
email: hgeorge@eskimo.com
smail: 22608 90th Ave W / Edmonds WA 98026
quote: <under construction>