Why write about something you don't know and don't understand at all, dear Us?
Address this question to yourself. In the example of the Mendeleev table, the inaccuracy of the wording is acceptable, because it is the OOP aspects that are being studied, not the features of chemical reactions. From the point of view of OOP, the classification is correct.
C-4: Address this question to yourself. In the Mendeleev table example, the inaccuracy of the wording is acceptable, as it is the OOP aspects that are being studied, not the features of the chemical reactions. From the point of view of OOP, the classification is correct.
I have nothing against PLO, but from the point of view of logic and general chemistry, it is absurd.
MQL4 Reference/ Language Fundamentals/ Object Oriented Programming/Inheritance
I thought it was in the table ....
...
I thought the table only had elements...
That's no way to behave, boy.
Why write about something you don't know and don't understand at all, dear Us?
Address this question to yourself. In the Mendeleev table example, the inaccuracy of the wording is acceptable, as it is the OOP aspects that are being studied, not the features of the chemical reactions. From the point of view of OOP, the classification is correct.
http://ibigdan.livejournal.com/14032161.html
http://ibigdan.livejournal.com/14032161.html
The dog would have dented the bonnet too.
The dog would have crumpled the bonnet too.
the dog wouldn't have jumped off the bonnet
With that logic, you could have written - an elephant would have dented the whole car