Ordinal numbers

[Richmond]

On 04/07/14 20:46, J. Landman Gay wrote:
> On 04/07/2014 17:09, Mark Wieder wrote:
>> +1 on that. In all my time using xtalk, I don't think I have ever
>> used ordinal numbers other than "first" and "last". And those
>> sparingly.
>
> And backward compatibility? I do see a few stacks that use ordinals.
>
> In case anyone is wondering, the reason they're there is because HC 
> incorporated them, and it was the Apple team that decided to limit the 
> number to ten. And yes, I still get requests for HC conversions (I'm 
> working on one right now.) I have also seen LC stacks that use 
> ordinals -- look in the forums some time.
>
> Should we really limit the language based on "most popular usage?" If 
> so then I'd like to remove all the long forms of various terms and use 
> only the synonyms that I use the most. "BackgroundColor" is too long 
> and I think we should ditch it and retain only "backColor", or even 
> better, "bgColor". Also, no one uses "firstColor" and "secondColor" so 
> let's drop those entirely.
>
> Honestly, you guys, this is one of the silliest discussions I've seen. 
> There is no reason to yank terms out of the language just because some 
> people don't use them. And the reason it came up? 

This was not 'that' awkward.

But it did point to inconsistencies in Livecode.

> Richmond had an awkward moment with a student. Whose problem is that?
>

Your point, Jacque, is well put. Backwards compatibility is a good 
thing: and I am well miffed about the lack of backward compatibility 
between pre 7 and post 7 Livecode vis-a-vis numToChar!

So; perhaps the way to keep everybody happy (well, Thee and Me, at 
least) is to have some sort of
rider in the Dictionary where the ordinal numbers are, that that is for 
backward compatibility and
"delete char 3" is to be preferred.

Richmond.