@property - take it behind the woodshed and shoot it?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 1/25/13 2:12 AM, Artur Skawina wrote:
> On 01/24/13 21:13, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 1/24/13 2:03 PM, Artur Skawina wrote:
>>> Trying to make arguments you don't like go away and silencing the messenger
>>> is your MO.
>>
>> Now that's what's called "ad hominem".
>
> No, it's not - it's just stating the facts; this was not the first such incident.

Of course it is. The definition is simple enough, e.g. from Wikipedia: 
An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man"), short for argumentum ad hominem, 
is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against 
their argument.

>>> Having said that, I'll elaborate on the sentence you quoted above. See for example
>>> Timon's code [1] here: http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/baa538af . Spot the recursion in the
>>> tree-walker.
>>
>> How about this: insert the parens and then demonstrate how the bug is easier to spot. Wasn't any easier for me.
>
> Bug? In Timon's code? Impossible. :)
>
> No, this is just about syntax. Some functions are not suitable for calling w/o '()',
> and the choice needs to stay with the callee. But the distinction is "sane/insane"
> for a reason - there's judgment, taste and common sense involved.
> Trusting every programmer to get it right won't work, unfortunately.

I'd say "sane/insane" is pushing it.


Andrei