User talk:Planck

Position Types

We don't really need to specify that a position type is an array, since that is already in the type's definition page (e.g. Position2D). There may be a few older pages left where we still have these overlapping definitions, but that's really obsolete, and we should rather trim them down to the exact position type definition. --Kronzky 21:01, 24 September 2008 (CEST)

Hi Planck, what you said on Kronzky's page makes no sense in some situations, as it is important what kind of array the command requires or returns, for example whether it is PositionAGL or ASL. --raedor 14:43, 25 September 2008 (CEST)

I'm not quite sure why it's so "utterly ridiculous" to use NAMES for some common type of arrays.

Yes, they're not unique data types, but when I use PositionAGL or Color everybody knows right away what kind of array to expect (number of elements, range of values), as well as their meaning. It makes easier reading for anybody familiar with scripting, and those see those the first time have to look it up anyway.

I've never heard of anybody being confused by Color not actually being it's own data type, but rather only a specific array usage, so I'm not quite sure what's so wrong about using names for common types of arrays. We use names in daily life all the time - you don't say "dog [animal]", but just "dog", assuming that the other person knows what you're talking about. Why shouldn't we use some common conventions on the Wiki? --Kronzky 19:34, 25 September 2008 (CEST)