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

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 1/25/13 5:56 AM, Artur Skawina wrote:
> On 01/25/13 08:39, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> 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.
>
> Hmm, I can see how you could view this as an ad hominem, given that definition,

How can that be seen as anything else? What definition do you have?

You made a mistake under the heat of the argument. We all do. Don't try 
to explain how actually you didn't. The right course is to casually 
apologize and move on.

> but it's not meant to be one and actually isn't - it has no bearing on
> the @property nor ()-less calls issues; this is just about the process.
>
> Remember how you originally replied to my message, after removing everything
> but one sentence, which was clearly both a summary of my subjective position
> and deliberately phrased in a way to encourage at least some consideration wrt
> $subject by others making a decision.

I kept the sentence that I had a reply for. The rest I understood and 
agreed with.


Andrei