On 1/25/13 2:12 AM, Artur Skawina wrote:
On 01/24/13 21:13, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 1/24/13 2:03 PM, Artur Skawina wrote:
Trying to make arguments you don't like go away and silencing the messenger
is your MO.
Now that's what's called "ad hominem".
No, it's not - it's just stating the facts; this was not the first such
incident.
Of course it is. The definition is simple enough, e.g. from Wikipedia:
An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man"), short for argumentum ad hominem,
is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against
their argument.
Having said that, I'll elaborate on the sentence you quoted above. See for
example
Timon's code [1] here: http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/baa538af . Spot the recursion in
the
tree-walker.
How about this: insert the parens and then demonstrate how the bug is easier to
spot. Wasn't any easier for me.
Bug? In Timon's code? Impossible. :)
No, this is just about syntax. Some functions are not suitable for calling w/o
'()',
and the choice needs to stay with the callee. But the distinction is
"sane/insane"
for a reason - there's judgment, taste and common sense involved.
Trusting every programmer to get it right won't work, unfortunately.
I'd say "sane/insane" is pushing it.
Andrei
