Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> writes:
> Hi Sergey,
> That is misrepresenting what happened.
No, it's you who are spreading misinformation, probably unintentional,
> First, you came up with a strategy. I pointed out shortcomings that
> implied that we cannot use it unchanged. Then, Buga fixed your strategy by
> using additional steps (making the process more complicated than before,
> still without a simple-enough explanation for my liking, fixing the
> shortcomings). Then, Phillip presented a super-simple strategy and Buga
> confirmed that it also fixes the shortcomings I pointed out.
Except that you've missed very essential thing: even before Phillip
presented his method, the original has been fixed and simultaneously
became even simpler. It's now entirely described in [RFC v2] that you
apparently still refuse to read.
> I am very excited that we finally found something that works *and* is easy
> to reason about.
You have chances to be even more exited as we in fact have 2 of them
that both work and are both easy to reason about.
> Let's focus on that strategy rather than going back to the strategy which
> has known flaws and only an unsatisfyingly complex explanation.
Not that fast, as it now has no known flaws and still has surprisingly
simple explanation. It also has its own niceties that are currently
being discussed elsewhere in the thread.