Re: [OT] quoting text

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 10:51:56 -0400, Stewart Gordon   
wrote:



Saaa wrote:
I guess it depends on your style.  If you respond to the entire  
message,
then putting at the top makes sense, because then you can read the  
response quickly, and read the history below if you want.


If I want to read the whole message you're replying to, I can open up  
the mesasge you're replying to in my newsreader.


Yes, but there are some issues there:

1. the newsgroup/newsreader sometimes doesn't correctly put your message  
as a reply to the original.
2. You may not read messages threaded, so it might be tough to find the  
original message.
3. You almost ALWAYS want to read the immediately responded-to message for  
context (i.e. quote level 1), I am annoyed when I have to close the  
message I was reading to read the one responded to.  Especially when I am  
following 5 threads at once.


I can see arguments for both methods.  I use both, but only really the  
second method for newsgroups.  I'm not sure why, but it just feels more  
natural.




But if you want to respond point-by-point, then going below makes  
sense. You can respond to each point, then have your main point at the  
bottomm of the message.

Who would do that!


Anybody who is well-educated on how to use newsgroups?


Gee, I don't remember having newsgroups 101 in school :P  In fact, I don't  
think I ever received education from anyone.  I just do what feels  
natural, and what makes sense.


My email clients always put quoted text below.  However, my news  
client always quotes above.



Below/above what?

- the cursor?

Yes


- one or more blank lines?

Yes


- your signature?

Yes


- the message you typed, after you hit the send button?

No, the quoted text appears as I type my message.

I for one would like to see newsreaders that will, at least as a pref,  
put the cursor above the quoted text and blank lines/sig below.  This  
sets the user ready to work down the message, trimming it down and  
inserting reply text where it fits.  See

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=227376


That sounds like a feature I would use.  I think another good feature  
would probably be to limit the quoted text to N levels (do you need 5  
levels of context to make your point?).


I do want to say that It doesn't bother me what people do, I just find it  
interesting how different social tools evolve in different directions,  
even when the interface is pretty much identical.


-Steve

Re: [OT] quoting text

[Stewart Gordon]

Saaa wrote:

I guess it depends on your style.  If you respond to the entire message,
then putting at the top makes sense, because then you can read the 
response quickly, and read the history below if you want.


If I want to read the whole message you're replying to, I can open up 
the mesasge you're replying to in my newsreader.



But if you want to respond point-by-point, then going below makes sense. 
You can respond to each point, then have your main point at the bottomm of 
the message.

Who would do that!


Anybody who is well-educated on how to use newsgroups?

My email clients always put quoted text below.  However, my news client 
always quotes above.



Below/above what?

- the cursor?
- one or more blank lines?
- your signature?
- the message you typed, after you hit the send button?

I for one would like to see newsreaders that will, at least as a pref, 
put the cursor above the quoted text and blank lines/sig below.  This 
sets the user ready to work down the message, trimming it down and 
inserting reply text where it fits.  See

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=227376

Stewart.

Re: Should be easy

[Christopher Wright]

Saaa wrote:

I did get it to compile at one time, but didn't know how to use it,
like your code..
index( array, index2);  //compiles and all, but how do I set the value?
index( array, index2) = -1; // doesn't work


If you're using d2, add 'ref' to the return type.

Otherwise, you need indexAssign:

void indexAssign(TArray : TArray[])(TArray array, BaseType!(TArray) 
value, int[] indices...)

{
static if (is (typeof (array[0]) == typeof(value))
{
array[indices[0]] = value;
}
else
{
indexAssign(array[indices[0]], value, indices[1..$]);
}
}


Also, why the ... ?


In case you know the number of indices ahead of time. It costs nothing 
and lets you use a more natural syntax some of the time.