Difference between revisions of "Talk:International Bank Account Number"
From Lazarus wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search (→Duplicate code: Revert omission of StrMod97 function source) |
|||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
::At least it should be clearly mentioned that that piece of code was taken from [[ISO_7064|that page]]. I agree that it would look a bit silly inside the code fragment. --[[User:Bart|Bart]] ([[User talk:Bart|talk]]) 20:08, 30 November 2021 (CET) | ::At least it should be clearly mentioned that that piece of code was taken from [[ISO_7064|that page]]. I agree that it would look a bit silly inside the code fragment. --[[User:Bart|Bart]] ([[User talk:Bart|talk]]) 20:08, 30 November 2021 (CET) | ||
:::Hopefully by reverting one of Alextp's edits, this is now clearer again. If not, feel free to edit :) [[User:Trev|Trev]] ([[User talk:Trev|talk]]) 10:32, 2 December 2021 (CET) | :::Hopefully by reverting one of Alextp's edits, this is now clearer again. If not, feel free to edit :) [[User:Trev|Trev]] ([[User talk:Trev|talk]]) 10:32, 2 December 2021 (CET) | ||
+ | ::::And yet, Alextp managed to make this now a useless hyperlinks, since he removed the body of the function frm said page. --[[User:Bart|Bart]] ([[User talk:Bart|talk]]) 21:39, 2 December 2021 (CET) |
Latest revision as of 22:39, 2 December 2021
Code is bad
See my msg: https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php?topic=57353.msg426321#msg426321 . Alextp (talk) 20:00, 28 November 2021 (CET)
Duplicate code
@Alextp: the code for the StrMOD97 function already resides here.
A link instead of duplication would be more appropriate IMHO. --Bart (talk) 20:36, 29 November 2021 (CET)
- A link in the middle of source code is not really appropriate when presenting a standalone program as in this case. Trev (talk) 05:28, 30 November 2021 (CET)
- At least it should be clearly mentioned that that piece of code was taken from that page. I agree that it would look a bit silly inside the code fragment. --Bart (talk) 20:08, 30 November 2021 (CET)