Scott Raney wrote: > Is anyone else struck by the irony of this post? Why do I waste my > time even trying to educate people on the issue when it's abundantly > clear that removing the mouse function from the language entirely is > only way to fix the problem...
Hmm, I thought someone had suggested that this aspect of the debate be closed.... Anyway, I think we've heard all the arguments, and neither side is budging an inch. Naturally; it's somewhat subjective. I know, you'd say it was entirely objective based on technical considerations, but that's a different issue; the subjective issue is whether this imperfect but to some likeable type of feature should be left in the hands of the MC/Rev users and their discretion be trusted as capable and worthy, or whether it should be discarded or at least least locked up tight with heavy chains and warning labels. I don't think any of the people who use MC or Revolution are completely void of intelligence, so just as a suggestion (not to be taken as a retort but seriously) how trusting users' judgment rather than looking down on them as needing to be educated and their hands slapped if they start to type out the wrong syntax? I think the educational message has been heard and will continue to be heard. A sentence or two in the documentation would probably be quite enough to ensure that the majority of people would be informed. You told me that using the functions for quick testing purposes or when the app is not given to other people. We disagree about use in education (not talking about CS majors here) and special situations in serious apps. If it is okay for testing, wouldn't it be inconvenient to have a global property which must be set before using it? Yes, perhaps the IDE could set that for us, but that would still provide a nuisance for people who did decide to use polling, however sparingly or rarely, in the final project. Of course, you'd think that was great so that they wouldn't even want to use it sparingly or rarely, but there's the subjectivity again, and it's taking a very low view of the users who still have the function around for one reason or the other. So why not stop pounding each other about it, especially with the personal comments about people who persist in doing it dirty RatherThanDoingItRight or are exasperatingly hard to "educate", and just find a good balance for the function which is easy enough to implement and provides a pretty acceptable behavior for those that are asking for behaviors? Then with or without a pesky global property (which I wouldn't recommend) we could have the issue settled and get on with more important and interesting things. I don't think people need so urgently to be saved from the dangers of polling functions--why not warn them about hydrogenated oils? Anyway, I *do* see the sense in what you're saying, but you *don't* see what other people are getting at when they want to retain the function. You can easily say that's because they're dense and wrong, but as I said, there's a subjective issue in the middle and you have to have objectivity and certain skills in looking at arguments and the process of thinking and debating to be able to see this step in the reasoning involved! BTW, the mouse is one thing, but I think there are some situations where the mouseLoc is necessary or at least very practical. When I have time to make a test card with some things I've noticed, I will see if this is true and if so, send you the scripts. If not, I truly apologize for my presumptions, but if I'm right, what will you say? Curry Kenworthy _______________________________________________ improve-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/improve-revolution
