okay charles, what you say is right. I guess I've been keeping my head down, studying, REBOL, Hardware, Maths, Assembler, buying a house amongst other things.
I only really read Joels & ladislavs & maarten's posts usually as I don't have much time these days and I admire these guys and their signal to noise ratio is lowest on this list and the quality of their opinions, ideas & commentary are amongst the highest on this list and who's comment s I value. I also tend to read the RT folks posts but Iam ocassionally dismayed by the high handed "Nope We're right , your wrong" attititude they sometimes take in regards to what some users like myself see as inconsistancies or imperfections in REBOL as it currently is. Sure they're busy folks and they DO A GREAT JOB! if only they wouldn't debate REBOL with a Nixon type view of better to appear strong (tho' wrong) than weak and right. Right and wrong here are solely my interpretations of the discussions / debates I've seen on this list. Zero Indexing is a great one that springs to mind. But If it keeps people happy in future I will keep my opinions to myself. Best wishes everybody, keep on REBOLling ;-) Mark Dickson In a message dated Thu, 7 Feb 2002 5:27:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, "chaz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 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. -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
