Comments by kalberts (Top 3 by date)

kalberts 3-Dec-18 19:20pm View

As I refer to several examples of overloaded functions, and possible resolution problems with different forms of parameter lists, you might have guessed that I do know what overloaded functions are. If I were a novice in that field, would I then have referred to resolution problems?

"What I am having a problem with": Is it really that difficult to understand that the headline: "Why are some string functions declared with params, others not?", and the final line: "Did the programmer just forget about params, or is there a rational/technical reason?" indicates that the question is about the use of the 'params' modifier - a specific use of it in one function call, not the other, in the same standard library?

I did refer to overloading, simply to made it clear that overloading resolution is NOT the explanation for this difference ("Maybe this would confuse the compiler. No. String.Split() has one 'params char[]' overload ..."). I told you explicitly that I am aware of the overload issue (which is the reason why you cannot have other parameters following a 'params'- if the next argument was of the same class as the 'params' one, it would not be possible to determine if it was a separate parameter or another element of the 'params'). Did you really think I explicitly mentioned this (as not being the explanation for the question I asked) because I had no clue whatsovever about overloading?

Do you still think that the headline, together with my final question, has nothing to do with what I would like to understand? Are you still certain that what I explain about overloads is my "real" question - that my overload-related explanation is my real problem, and that I have no clue about overloading? That the headline and final question is just some sort of nice wrapping, and really irrelevant?

Or have you just recently learned about overloading yourself, and are so fascinated by it that your entire world is focused on that? "When all you've got is a hammer, then the whole world is a nail" type approach?

A single person can make me loose faith in the usefulnes of asking in an internet forum "Why are some string functions declared with params, others not?" hoping to get an answer to why some string functions are declared with 'params', others not. Why would any Internet 'helper' care to spend resources on understanding that the question is about use of 'params', when he can pretend that the asker is clueless about overloading?

... So forget it. I might try to google it myself. That will probably be more helpful than asking for an expert explanation in an internet forum :-(

kalberts 3-Dec-18 16:28pm View

Geee... You are so great in you understanding of what the question was about!
And you are similarly great in understanding what background the questioner has.

(However, you are not similarly clever in understanding sarcasm, after some "helper" has completely ignored the real question, but simply assumed that the questioner is a dimwit who should be told to learn the basics before he asks a fairly sophisticated question. Read my question anew, closely, and try to determine whether I know anything at all about the basics of overloading!)

kalberts 3-Dec-18 10:54am View

Yeah, I guess that is it. I didn't have a clue about overloading, so I have to study that concept, and that will give me the understanding of the question I asked. I suppose you are right then. Thanks for your help on this matter.