Talk:Event: Difference between revisions
>Legend26 →Change to object page?: new section |
>JulienDethurens |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
Should we change this to an object page like format? (One for RBXScriptSignal and RBXScriptConnection) For one, it would look better and for two it's a lot easier to maintain a couple of method templates instead of this. You might say it's not an instance, but technically it is. It's just not a subclass of the instance class. I want input before I do this. <span style="font-size: 75%; line-height: inherit;">[[User:Legend26|Legend26]] ([[User talk:Legend26|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Legend26|contribs]])</span> 15:54, 22 January 2012 (EST) | Should we change this to an object page like format? (One for RBXScriptSignal and RBXScriptConnection) For one, it would look better and for two it's a lot easier to maintain a couple of method templates instead of this. You might say it's not an instance, but technically it is. It's just not a subclass of the instance class. I want input before I do this. <span style="font-size: 75%; line-height: inherit;">[[User:Legend26|Legend26]] ([[User talk:Legend26|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Legend26|contribs]])</span> 15:54, 22 January 2012 (EST) | ||
:It would be easier to maintain and everything, but it isn't an instance, so we shouldn't put it on an instance page. | |||
Revision as of 20:56, 22 January 2012
Oops. Maybe rename this "Events" since the page already exists. --GoldenUrg 05:08, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Also, this page shows up in the Category:Events page, which I don't want. How do I fix that? --GoldenUrg 05:15, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Using term "anonymous"
"Anonymous" doesn't sound right, when used in conjunction with the word "function." Is there a better substitute? Or is it just me?
- "Anonymous function" is a commonly used term for functions that aren't given names, see Wikipedia --SNCPlay42 18:28, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, k.
Change to object page?
Should we change this to an object page like format? (One for RBXScriptSignal and RBXScriptConnection) For one, it would look better and for two it's a lot easier to maintain a couple of method templates instead of this. You might say it's not an instance, but technically it is. It's just not a subclass of the instance class. I want input before I do this. Legend26 (talk | contribs) 15:54, 22 January 2012 (EST)
- It would be easier to maintain and everything, but it isn't an instance, so we shouldn't put it on an instance page.
