This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: FOO vs FO
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: Re: [xsl] FOO vs FO
- From: David Carlisle <davidc at nag dot co dot uk>
- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:17:46 +0100
- References: <6B3877B8D238D511852700B0D068CA9D906032@SH24X693>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
> Why was FOO
It's a law. "random strings" in examples have to be "foo" and "bar".
This law was laid down by Kernighan and Richie at the same time they
were defining the language C. Whilst C is an imperative programming
language (thus an ugly blot on the landscape to the pure and virtuous
members of the declarative programming community as found on this list)
some aspects of C have spread to all languages, and using foo,bar in
examples is one.
David
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list