On 01/12/2016 11:46 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
I understand, and I've said I'll find the time to reduce my case and
we can do that work. I just don't have any free time at work right
now, I'll get to this as soon as I can.

This will work exceedingly well. Thanks.

Regarding this discussion, as far as I'm concerned, this is a separate
conversation regarding the validity of the features existence. I want
to convince you that it's wrong. Fixing the existing design is a
separate conversation, which I'll reopen as soon as I have more
information for you.
Of course, it would save a lot of effort if you agreed that the design
is wrong, and none of us need to do anything further.

This is less likely to go over well. Walter and I pore over your posts over the phone and are unable to understand what you mean to say, down to the use of vocabulary (e.g. "lookup" when no lookup is involved). Often we have no idea what "this" or "it" refers to in text.

It is clear there is a problem somewhere. The best way, by far, to make progress is to show code that should work and doesn't.


Andrei

Reply via email to