[r-t] Reverse methods

[edward martin]

On 8/4/06, Richard Smith <richard at ex-parrot.com> wrote:
> Don Morrison wrote:
>
> > On 8/4/06, Richard Smith <richard at ex-parrot.com> wrote:
> > > Except with principles, there is no requirement for the
> > > reverse of a method to be called Reverse <whatever>.
> >
> > Is the reverse (ouch) of this true? Can I call an abitrary, unrelated
> > to anything else method "Reverse Bumbershoot", or even "Reverse
> > Bristol"?
>
> Yes, absolutely.
>
> RAS

Ought to be a law agin it
grr

mew