On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 09:07:28PM -0500, Neal Hogan wrote: > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Glen Barber <glen.j.bar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 9/23/10 8:31 PM, Chad Perrin wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:24:58PM -0500, Neal Hogan wrote: > >>> > >>> If you like xmonad, check out scrotwm. It's inspired by xmonad, > >>> lightweight, written in C by oBSD dev, actively maintained, and > >>> vim-like (among other things ;-). > >> > >> Why is "written in C" considered such a great benefit by the Scrotwm > >> developer(s)? Earlier today, I read this on the site: > >> > >> "On the other hand xmonad has great defaults, key bindings and > >> xinerama support but is crippled by not being written in C." > >> > > hahahahahahaha! > > >> What's up with that? How does Haskell "cripple" xmonad? > >> > > In the end, you need not take yourself so seriously. The thread was > generic enough to allow for some rhetorical flourish. I suggested > something . . . pointed out that is written in C (as did the homepage) > . . . AND you concluded some sort of insult; not my problem. > > Do you need a rim-shot for every joke?
1. Who said I took insult? You assume too much. 2. That was not a very clever joke, anyway. Where's the punchline? 3. That doesn't answer my question about the Scrotwm page. Even *I* am not so socially stunted as to think a comment like that on the Scrotwm site would not raise some eyebrows. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
pgpWwsil6KpeG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
