Re: Problem with Include

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 9:54 AM, David Hutto <smokefloat@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Daniel P. Brown > <daniel.brown@parasane.net> wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 02:48, Ravi Gehlot <ravi@ravigehlot.net> wrote: >>> My point is that you tried to take code from one page and put it all >>> "organized" in another page and the include that page of includes back into >>> the pages that you want it to feed off from. If stuff works the way that it >>> does then there a reason for it to have been done that way. >> >>    So you think no one should ever do that because it's only making >> it look pretty?  Ever hear of maintainability? >> >>> That's why documenting code is so important. 99% doesn't do it (including >>> me). >> >>    Please cite your source. > > > Personally, I'd even have to admit mine was(and is) less than 99% compatible > with what I'd like it to be. > >> >> -- >> </Daniel P. Brown> >> Dedicated Servers, Cloud and Cloud Hybrid Solutions, VPS, Hosting >> (866-) 725-4321 >> http://www.parasane.net/ >> > > > > -- > They're installing the breathalyzer on my email account next week. > -- They're installing the breathalyzer on my email account next week.