On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 19:17:56 +0100
Steven J Long sl...@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk wrote:
If the problem had been adequately communicated in the first place
(which is pretty much required for any proposal ime) instead of people
being told they don't understand so go away we could have agreed
then,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2009.06.08 19:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[snip]
Easily-extractable EAPI either has change scope limitations or a
considerable performance impact.
That needs to be quantified. e.g. 20ms to 200ms is a factor of 10x but
it would not be considered
On Monday 08 June 2009 20:35:22 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 19:17:56 +0100
And how much developer time would be wasted to do so, and indeed has
already been wasted on this?
Thanks to emails like yours, lots.
5-2009, 800 emails
11.75% ciaran.mccreesh.googlemail.com
4-2009,
On Monday 08 of June 2009 22:41:12 Patrick Lauer wrote:
[snip]
Thanks for your useless statistics.
--
Cheers
Dawid
[Answering to a random posting in this thread.]
Please, stop this now, or continue your discussion in private.
Thanks
Ulrich
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2009.06.07 16:54, Rémi Cardona wrote:
Seriously, let's stop.
This endless debate has gone on for waaay too long and it is just
plain
spam now.
[snip]
Let's just all agree we've failed to reach a consensus and let's
spend time on
