On Tuesday, 23 April 2013 at 07:19:47 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
Sorry, most of my responses are really short because I'm
working on other things at the moment.
I'm just trying to say a few sentences to make a point and go
back to what I'm doing, but it's not going as well as I would
have hoped.
OK.
On Tuesday, 23 April 2013 at 07:19:47 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
Honestly, out of all the things I said, you also picked and
chose single one to give nonsensical replies to.
I said C and C++ and VB.NET and Matlab etc., and you just
replied with "C struct doesn't even have ==".
I'm just replying to this because I wanted to make it clear what
I did:
I booted up a Linux VM and wrote a quick program to try to
understand where you were coming from, taking a painstaking
effort to try to understand you and the context of what you're
trying to say. I didn't respond to all of the other languages
because I was immediately confused by the result of the first
and, additionally, trying all of the above languages would be
fairly time consuming. My apologies for not trying all of them.
My intention was for good when I did it, so I hope that's enough
to earn forgiveness for "picking and choosing a single one to
give nonsensical replies to". :-\
Not only did you completely miss my first point there (why
aren't other languages doing the same thing?), you also missed
my second point:
If == doesn't make sense, it shouldn't be defined at all.
Also, your second point wasn't missed. It simply didn't exist
before I had started trying the C code.
TBH, I think this would be a better solution. But I'd bet it'd
break way too much code now.
