[r-t] What IS a rotation of a method?

[Matthew Frye]

On 18 Oct 2014, at 14:12, James White <jw_home at ntlworld.com> wrote:

> Are we not now getting close to the situation where someone tells me that I have rung something different from what I thought just because my "method" can be thought of as a rotation of another "method"?

That's only true if you think that rotating your method actually makes it a different method. If a rotation doesn't make it a different method we're telling you that you rang the method you thought you rang, just that it's called something else (something the rules already do and must always do if we're to have a sane naming system).

MF