After reading another of your lame "oh dear, I'm sorry if I offended anyone,
how did that happen, excuse me for your misunderstanding me yet again", I
realized how very sharply your posts stand out from everyone else's.

Made me appreciate, once again, how very high the signal-to-noise is on this
list.

Thanks, Robbo, I guess.

----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 12:41 AM
Subject: [REBOL] Re: Tuples - Was Pair! thread


HOLGER / JEFF / EVERYBODY

After re-reading the tone of my earlier message I apologise if it came
across as offensive and flamebait
and please accept my apologies for this.

However I still think the reasoning or justification Holger gave was flawed
hence the tuple example I gave.

Sorry for any offence caused and I'll try to ensure my future mailings are
focused more on the issues at hand
rahter than being misconstrued as flamebait.

Is Pair! a lame datatype?

cheers & sorry,

Mark

In a message dated Wed, 6 Feb 2002  2:59:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, Jeff
Kreis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>
> Hello, robb0l:
>
> > seems  reasonable  to  me,  but  then  again  so  do  Joels
> > arguments / logic,  saying pair! are only meant  to be used
> > strictly  in a Rebol/View  pixel co-ordinate  context seems
> > like a cop  out to me, either that  or insufficient thought
> > goes into REBOL language  design & implementation, which is
> > it Holger?
>
> Hmm.. nice piece of flamebait.
>
> -jeff
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the
> subject, without the quotes.


--
To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the
subject, without the quotes.


-- 
To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the 
subject, without the quotes.

Reply via email to