On 09/12/15 11:00, "Development on behalf of Oswald Buddenhagen" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
>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. And I’d say it’s about time to stop that particular sub-thread. It’s neither productive nor leading anywhere. Thanks, Lars _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
