Possible solution to template bloat problem?

[Regan Heath]

On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 02:46:33 +0100, Ramon <spam at thanks.no> wrote:

> On Tuesday, 20 August 2013 at 22:58:24 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 20 August 2013 at 22:49:40 UTC, Ramon wrote:
>>> Happily I'm stupid and completely missed the condescending tone of an  
>>> evident genius. Instead I'll just be grateful that it pleased one of  
>>> the D masters to drop some statement down at me at all.
>>
>>>> Awesome, thank you and keep destroying.
>>>
>>> "destroying"??? Which part of "not to bash it" and of "D means a lot  
>>> to me" and of "D is, no doubts, an excellent and modern incarnation of  
>>> C/C++. As
>>> far as I'm concerned D is *the* best C/C++ incarnation ever,
>>> hands down." was too complicated to understand for your genius brain?
>>
>> I knew this would happen at some point:
>> Andrei uses "destroy" as a positive term to denote a well-reasoned  
>> powerful argument/response.
>>
>> Chill :)
>
> Uhum.
>
> Well, where I live "to destroy" has a pretty clear and very negative  
> meaning.
> I took that post (of Mr. Alexandrescu) as very rude and condescending  
> and I do not intend to change my communication habits so as to  
> understand "to destroy" as a positive statement or even a compliment.

Have you heard the phrase "when in Rome..".  Seriously, you would rather  
assume a negative meaning/intent even after someone has taken the time to  
explain the intent/usage of the word/phrase in this grand forum?

I sense that you may be beyond reasonable advice at this point?  But, if  
not..

Always start by assuming good intent, if you're right (and you will be 90%  
of the time) no problem.  If you're wrong, well at least you've not gotten  
worked up about it (so they have failed in their goal) and chances are it  
will annoy the abuser even more that you haven't (so ultimately, you win).

Communication in written form is fraught with pitfalls, and this thread  
demonstrates how comments can be taken in completely the wrong way.   
Dicebot's "I am dangerously close to hating you." was meant in a friendly  
way, /you/ decided not to read it that way.  Likewise Andrei's style is  
abrupt but there are good reasons for this, none of which include the goal  
of offending but /you/ have chosen to read them that way.

Sure, more effort could be taken to make it clearer with excess smileys  
etc.  But, that stuff isn't necessary for communicating the content, and  
isn't necessary between established forum members, and isn't necessary if  
everyone just assumes good intent from the outset.

All the best,
Regan

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/