I'm so glad to read your many replies to my simple questions and statements. They have told me much about yourselves and your philosophies. And, from what I can gather, most of you are not even programmers, yet, for some reason you are attracted to the use of non-descriptive and counter intuitive terminology and structure. Many of you admit that you have failed to grasp "modern" programming languages, and that is why you have come here to learn Construct - which maintains that same programming paradigm that has given you such fits. Quite a dilemma for you, I should think.
[quote:2j3po168]Using industry standard terms which happen to be the best and most suitable terms does not make a product difficult or less intuitive, quite the opposite.
This statement assumes that because the industry uses this standard of terminology that it automatically makes it the "best and most suitable". For whom, I might ask?
Really, I do understand both terms: variable and global variable, I just don't find them very descriptive, nor do I find terms like "function", "exception", "z-depth",(since not all software uses the Z axis to define depth), and many many more.
It seems that those who initially "invented" programming conventions didn't spend much time thinking about what words really mean in English, and this would explain why these conventions survive until this day.
And those of you who think you need to be proficient in advanced mathematics to make the simple things found in today's AAA games, which sell millions of copies, might possibly be in danger of making your heads explode, as it appears our dear friend Deadeye's head might do at any moment.
Good day,
Psmith