Re: Lua Certification - an informal discussion

[Michael Roth <mroth@...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Vijay Aswadhati wrote:

>>Why you doesn't simply tell the truth? Your motivation is to make
>>money, regardless of the benefits of your "certification".
>
> Since when is making money a bad thing? Or am I missing a point here?

Maybe you missed something, so I will take it a little bit further:

Most spammers are "only" trying to sell some drugs. So is that money
making a bad thing?


>>If you try to certificate lua programmers, shouldn't you know that in
>>lua there aren't any classes? There are only tables and some syntactic
>>sugar... There also no such thing as "instance methods and
>>variables"...
>
> This is nitpicking at best. All of the above concepts can be emulated.

Hmm, nitpicking I think not. You can emulate some OO even in C. There
are a few #$%§$ examples in the open source world. I will not name them,
because I won't start that discussion...
But the point is: If you can emulate OO concepts in C, is it nitpicking
to say there aren't such things as classes or instance methods in C but
only in C++ which is (somewhat) OO?
You can even emulate some OO concepts in brain dead shell scripts, so is
it o.k. to say shell scripts have classes and other OO stuff?

Why there exists different wording for functions, procedures and
methods? Is that all about nitpicking? I think not. The purpose of these
words are to distinguish important differences in the concepts behind.


Michael Roth

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCvHS9SIrOxc3jOmoRAjVjAKCnJolWjmHQZzpxkxHFp3wZl/XB7ACguph+
VR5uq2z+ZtYhxkvmSqvU78A=
=GK2q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----