On Monday, February 2, 2004, 2:25:47 AM, Michael wrote:

> Jim Weirich wrote:

>> 
>> 1) It is context sensitive.  Is the following snippet of code a
>>    flip/flop? ...

> I will agree that on a *purely* academic level, that's true. 
> However, I (nor anyone I've ever worked with) don't run, read,
> write, or otherwise deal with code that has absolutely 0 context
> around it, so the argument there is somewhat moot.

It's a POV thing.  I agree with what you're saying on an academic
level, but ... :)

> [...]

>> There have been a number of library based suggestions.  I think
>> something along those lines will make a nice replacement, and I
>> suspect will be even more flexible in the end.

> I'd be willing to use a replacement if/when one presents itself. 
> I doubt it will be as flexible or concise, but we will have to see.

I certainly nominate you for a position on the Flip-Flop Object-Based
Solution Selection Committee :)

(Which means I'd like to see your comments on existing posted
solutions.  What are their drawbacks?)

Cheers,
Gavin