On 9/22/06, Felix <pfr6rs_at_pnkfx.org> wrote:
>
> +1 for "unit"
>
> (I personally prefer "unit" to "void", due to exposure to David
> Gifford's thoughts on "what void really means", despite precedent
> established in C...)
I think "void" can still be a reasonable name, meaning "a value devoid
of content", even if the meaning "no value here" isn't quite right. I
think "unit" can be confusing to anyone not brushed up on type theory,
but everyone knows that "void" means some variation on "nothing".
--
Carl Eastlund
Received on Fri Sep 22 2006 - 11:28:56 UTC