On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 12:50 AM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > > On 10/21/2018 5:54 PM, Manu wrote: > > Would you please respond to my messages, and specifically, respond to > > the code that I presented to you in response to your broken example. > > Or any of my earlier fragments throughout this thread. I've shared > > quite a few, and so far, nobody has ever produced a criticism of any > > of my fragments. They've just been skipped over. > > That's just the problem. You've posted 62 messages so far in this thread, and > then there's all the ones Nicholas posted.
I sent it twice... again just a short while ago right before this one... but you responded to this one and not that one O_o > Trying to assemble the "earlier fragments throughout this thread" is not > practical for readers, and the endless nature of this thread is ample evidence > for it. The n.g. is a place to discuss a proposal, not the proposal itself. > > This change is definitely merits an actual proposal DIP, so that one is > assured > of seeing the complete proposal, rationale, examples, etc., in one document, > as > well as not being distracted by sidebars, thread drift, and mistakes. This > document can evolve with corrections and clarifications from the discussion, > and > anyone can get up to speed quickly by just reading the latest version of it. Okay, but I still want you to respond to my corrections of your program, which were in direct response to you... twice. > > But the one aimed directly at your own most recent sample program > > addresses your program directly. > > My most recent sample program was a direct criticism of one of your fragments, > so please don't say "nobody has ever ...". I do understand your frustration at > finding it hard to get your point across, but the problem at least for me is > trying to mine it from nuggets scattered across 62 posts. Mine it, refine it, > cast it into an ingot, then present it as a DIP. I posted it, twice... 2 messages, back to back, and you're responding to this one, and not that one. I'll post it again...
