On 1/27/13 12:37 PM, Dicebot wrote:
On Sunday, 27 January 2013 at 16:50:47 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Off topic rant.
I suppressed a counterexample in the section Optional parentheses
- Extra note .
The note state that some stuff are valid for *function* and the
counter example showed ambiguity using opCall. I don't know who did
this and I don't care. I however can't stand intellectual dishonesty.
It was me, sorry if I have offended you. I tend to read "function" as
"callable" if not mentioned otherwise and thus was wandering how note
refers to this case. This left counter-example in hope that someone will
comment it.
Now I see that it should be better suited to discussion, but at that
time it was just curiosity, not desire to prove anything.
I think we should leave the example somewhere, it's a syntactical case
we need to look at. Regarding the original remark, intellectual
dishonesty is as damaging as assuming it off-the-cuff.
Andrei
