[DGD] Re: My idea for the DGD driver - validate

[Erwin Harte]

On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 03:47:37PM +0000, Robert Forshaw wrote:
[...]
>            I am making an assumption here, based on how he has treated me 
> in the past, and I believe I'm entitled to make this assumption, but I 
> think he was just seeking an oppertunity to sound condescending towards me. 

You're entitled to make assumptions.  You would be wrong, however.

> As far as I'm concerned, only a novice doesn't know what 'private' and 
> 'static' are.

As far as I'm concerned you're a novice on this list and in the first
few weeks you've worked very hard on confirming the impression that
you're a novice with DGD and possible LPC.  As a result I don't think
it was unreasonable for me to assume you hadn't realized the
possibilities of private and static functions.

I do apologize for not reading the 100+ line email carefully enough in
the middle of a work day and as a result missing that you had in fact
mentioned the concept of private functions yourself, and then
dismissed them as unnecessary or inadequate.

[...]
> The topic was not 'keep arguing that 'static' and 'private' are relevent to 
> my post,

Not trying to be condenscending here, but you are familiar with the
concept of topic-drift in discussions, yes?

>                                                             To clarify, 
> anything that isn't about my validation idea, or the fallabilities of 
> masking call_other, is probably off-topic, and you shouldn't post it.

To use words very similar to your own:

    I don't remember you being assigned the position of topic
    master.  We are all individuals so you are only speaking for
    yourself.  You are wrong in this statement because I don't agree
    with you.

Have a nice day. :)

Erwin.
-- 
Erwin Harte <harte at is-here.com>
_________________________________________________________________
List config page:  http://list.imaginary.com/mailman/listinfo/dgd