Hey Linda. I do remember that thread, and I apologize for my words. I honestly try my best here. But it seems that I cannot reply to you without offending you, so, to avoid further offenses I will not reply to any further email from you in the future.
I'm sorry that I offended you, it was not my intention, though that doesn't matter much. On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 03:27:12PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote: > > > Eduardo A. Bustamante López wrote: > >Well, if your scripts are so simple, why use local functions at all? > --- > Cleanliness, Hygiene... > > > You're > >claiming we invent stuff to make your examples fail, but I don't know anyone > >that writes such complex code for very simple tasks that can even be done > >without functions. > --- > You know of me -- but you know nothing of my use case. > > >So, the burden to prove these convoluted approaches are > >justified is on *your* side. > --- > I don't need to justify my code to you. Someone asked > for a use case, and I supplied one. > > I didn't write that code for this discussion. Last mod-time was 1 month > ago (Mar 17). I wrote it BEFORE any of this discussion on > local functions. > > >The "local" function you provided is clearly a fake case. > --- > If it is "clearly" a fake case, you are clearly an idiot. I've > been using that code for it's purpose, unchanged for over a month. That's > what is clear. > > >Provide real world > >cases, so that we can make real world criticism and take decisions that > >affect > >people writing actual useful code. > ---- > Your definition of real-world cases are ones that you can provide > "real world criticism" to shoot down any example provided. I'm not the only > one who notices that tendency on this list: > > > Peng Yu wrote: > >On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 8:49 PM, Chet Ramey <chet.ra...@case.edu> wrote: > >>[Show us your valid real world example] > > > >One could also ask the same question for local variables. Any limited > >cases that show local variable is need, by definition, can be changed > >to ones in which global variables can also work. > > > >Therefore, ***no matter what small examples that I should show here, it > >will *** > > ***always be criticized as can be solved by an alternative solution ***. > ----- > [Emphasis mine]. > Peng Yu says the same thing. No matter what case someone comes up with, > there are the rigid-thinkers who believe they, and they alone can judge > what are "real world" and "not fake" cases. GAG! > > > >If that's the complete script... > > Now you are setting up your own strawman cases to shoot down. > > I showed 12 lines with an *ellipses* after the code out of a 70 line script > and you start making arguments based on those 12 lines being the > entirety of the script. > > I deliberately didn't show the rest of the script because it was > not important to show a use case developed and in use long before > this discussion was started --- so unless you have some evidence that > it is a 'fake' script, I'd say you are purposely lying to support > your case. > > You don't read what we write. Just like with my note "IFS=:& splitting > paths -- (maybe fixed in 4.3?)", where you answered "what the fuck". > > If you had read the entire note -- I pointed out 4 examples of > behavior that exists, asking "rhetorical" questions about how > the behavior was justified -- because the last example contradicted > the previous examples. > > You skipped that last question in your response, and totally missed > the point FLAMING me for my observations and questioning of behavior > on the 1st 4. Then you again go off on me saying: > > "I guess you think that you look smart by > obfuscating your code with aliases and weird names, but it's the opposite > effect. Also, it annoys people that are trying to understand what you say to > 'help'[sic] you." > > Another example of your twisting words and not reading what is there: > > I talked about IFS being 'thrashed' -- i.e. it no longer has it's initial > default value, and there is no way to set it to "default" > other than reinitializing it with some arbitrary hardcoded default. > > You go off and say "what do you mean by 'IFS is trashed'?" > > Notice "thrash" -- from "goog: define thrashed" 1st entry urban dictionary: > thrashed -- destroyed or hurt really badly, usually used to refer to > someone after they have tried a huge gap and died. > > I was referring to a built-in variable that had it's default > meaning (contents) overwritten to the point of not being able > to recover it (except by hardcoding the current "default" into > an assignment). > > Please stop looking to pick apart my words. It doesn't matter WHAT type of > example I come up with. You will > find some reason to _not_ understand it and call it fake, unreal or > annoying. Please, Eduardo: learn some new way of "helping" people -- > calling them liars (accusing them of writing "fake" code) isn't helpful. > > > > > -- Eduardo Bustamante https://dualbus.me/