About the Expressiveness of D

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 09:25:30 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu  
<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:

> On 4/3/13 11:24 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 14:42:12 -0400, Walter Bright
>> <newshound2 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/3/2013 9:49 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>>>> +1
>>>
>>> Stylistic nit:
>>>
>>> When writing a one-liner post like this, please do not quote the
>>> entire preceding post, especially if it is long. We have great forum
>>> software, and the newsreaders as well are great at navigating the
>>> threads.
>>
>> I couldn't disagree more. The given +1 had 4 lines of context. There was
>> some straggling text after it, but this was only an additional 5 lines.
>
> I'm with Walter. The top context was fine for that message. The bottom  
> was not seeing as the poster had nothing to say about it. Deleting the  
> bottom is good common courtesy.
>
> Walter himself used to leave vast amounts of trailing context in our  
> communication, and it saved me significant time when he started to  
> consistently trim it. With trailing chaff, essentially every reader  
> needs to scroll down to find "is there anything more this guy wanted to  
> add"? Some don't even insert an empty line.

Mac mail fixed this problem for me.  All previously received text is  
folded out, no need to look at it.

>> My newsreader highlights replied-to text in different colors depending
>> on the level of indent. I can immediately pick out new replies, and if I
>> don't want to read the re-posted stuff, I don't have to, unless I want
>> to for context.
>
> Mine too, but that doesn't make the problem go away.

It doesn't?  It pretty much fixes it for me.  I can see exactly what the  
new text is via it's color.

>> Newsreaders are known not to thread things properly, and some people's
>> posts don't thread properly ANYWHERE. Context is important.
>
> Yes, just not trailing chaff.

I agree, it's not necessary.  But it's not worth a public scolding either.

>>> Not to pick on you, but I see this a lot here from many of our
>>> participants and finally felt compelled to speak up!
>>
>> I find posts that are solely about how you didn't "post properly"
>> annoying. Kind of like compulsively telling someone they didn't use
>> correct grammar (for which I have to fight my instincts in order to
>> remain married). Sorry, I had to say something ;)
>
> Such posts are good because netiquette is not as widespread and as  
> agreed upon as grammar.

Such posts are annoying precisely because there is no agreed upon  
netiquette.  There is no "Right way" to post.

It's actually kind of ironic that grammar is NOT policed here as much,  
simply because we all agree to post in English, and that's not always the  
author's native language.

-Steve