<thomas.mertes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> On 10 Feb., 18:56, "Malcolm McLean" <regniz...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> What do you think about the rest of the chapter?
> Are my descriptions understandable or missleading?
>
> Greetings Thomas Mertes
>
It needs a bit more human interest. People aren't expecting you to be
Oscar
Wilde, but they like a few jokes or touches of cleverness in technical
descriptions. Not irrelevant jokes added in, that just irritates, but
human
touches arising naturally from the material
this
Such an universal type is loved by proponents of
dynamic typed languages, but there are also good reasons
to have destinct types for different purposes.
is an example. That doesn't annoy, but it talks about people rather than
about things, and even the most technical of script kiddies is more
interested in people than he is in things. You need more like this.
The other thing is that I thought "Oh no, yet another object-oriented
language". You need to be a bit more of a salesman. What does Seed7 have
to
offer that would make a Java programmer, for example, want to learn it?
You
must have your opinion. It needs to ****ne through.
--
Free games and programming goodies.
http://www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
|
