| ??? 09/10/01 06:26 Read: times |
#14845 - RE: Coments field ( ;) - Kathy |
For 2 guys ,(erik ,andy )
They try to explain you that the comment you work on doesn't do anything more than a note which explain CPU behaviour. For actually , what general programmer want (except Gil) is to tell someone or even himself to understand on logic or algorithm base not instruction or CPU behaviour base. That's why we want to develope on high level language which describe less what CPU done. There's no boundary for using comment sign but your usage tell nothing more than what is happenning (or nearly to happen) in CPU . |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;), Kathy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) - Kathy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No Never Comment !! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) - Kathy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Still Off_Base - Kathy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) - Kathy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) - Bordyn | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;),Alfredo | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;),Gil | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;),Bordyn | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;),Bordyn | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;),Andy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Coments field ( ;),Andy | 01/01/70 00:00 |



