How about a summery of what you do understand?
I parse his statement as
Re-reading chromatic's post, chromatic's $item is probably cawley's $that
In other words, let everybody check their own underpants for ticks, no peeking :)
I think I get it, but as usual chromatic's entry leaves you wanting more. FWIW, I'm not that well versed in OOP.
In reply to Re: Programming patterns
by Anonymous Monk
in thread Programming patterns
by McA
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |