From: Nathan on
On Mar 3, 5:50 pm, nos...(a)see.signature (Richard Maine) wrote:
> Nathan <ngrec...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > In my second post, I posted the differing declarations in the main
> > function and stated that the others were the same in both.
>
> It wasn't the case here, but it isn't at all unusual for descriptions
> like "the same" to cover up a problem. It can easily be that the poster
> just didn't see the difference. That kind of thing happens all the time
> - that your eyes just see what they think should be there instead of
> what is actually there. My eyes aren't imune to that either (not by a
> long shot). Those can be the easiest kinds of problems for someone else
> to help with. Or it can be that what you thought was essentially the
> same turned out to have a difference that you didn't appreciate.
>
> As noted, that wasn't he case here, but it happens often enough that any
> time I see any description at all substituted for actual code, it sets
> off an internal warning light. Yes, that definitely includes
> descriptions like "the same".
>
> I'd much rather see both copies so that I can verify they are the same.
> It might seem like showing one copy and saying that the other was "the
> same" could save work, but it doesn't. It certainly doesn't save work if
> that covers up the problem. But even if the description is accurate,
> that still slows me down because of needing to consider the possibility
> that it wasn't accurate.
>
> Just for future reference.
>
> --
> Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
> email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
> domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain

Well, thanks for clearing that up. I'll take note of that and act
accordingly.

You've been a great help.

-Nathan