On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 08:43:53PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote: > On Tuesday 08 December 2015 15:52:06 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > your triple emphasis that it's not necessary *anywhere* in python > > implied that you do indeed mean more than just locals. > > Only for someone who chimes in on a side-line without having read the > thread's first mail... > actually, it's quite reasonable to take someone by their word when they make such an effort to emphasize it without further qualification.
> I don't *care* whether it's "var" or no keyword or JS variant or > _whatever_. I said it's about the omission of the _type name_. > you're still not getting it. python's property of omitting the type name is *inherently* linked to it being dynamic. it's *meaningless* to compare the two. you're essentially arguing that auto is *just* like QVariant because it shares some of the visible properties. how is that an argument for *anything*? > You deliberately misunderstand and drag this subthread on and then > zoom in on the first slip of mine. That's trolling at it's worst. > i didn't misunderstand anything (deliberately or not), and didn't present it as such, either. all i did was pointing out that the analogy wasn't that apt, and that your "joke" actually backfired. *you* dragged it out by deciding to treat me like an idiot instead of trying to understand and acknowledge the point (however trivial you may find it). > > so let's state the purpose even more clearly: i'm giving you a lesson. > > I should have known.... tr(Besserwisser). > i'm sure the irony of *you* saying that is momentarily lost on you. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
