Another idiom I wish were gone from phobos/druntime

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 5 February 2015 at 19:19:43 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> To be frankly brutal, you were never in. You presented no 
>> argument.
>
> I did, by stating that the way Eiffel does is how it is 
> supposed to be.
>

In the links that were provided to you, you'll see one instance 
of Eiffel's designer saying that this was done like this at first 
for ease of implementation and then it stated like this for 
historical reason, and that the sensible thing to do is to put 
the check in the caller.

No, if you want to say that Eiffel is the way it should, while 
even its creator think this is not the case, you have to 
substantiate. Saying that Eiffel do it in some way is certainly a 
fact, but not an argument.

> I was dry with my statement, because by calling the 
> verification industry as cargo cultists, I could only depreend 
> no argument on my side would change your opinion.
>

In fact this is very possible to change my opinion. If you read 
the bug report, you'll notice that I'm defending a position 
similar to yours at first.

Considering that someone who contradict you cannot be convinced 
anyway is a lazy. I'm not changing my position because no new 
argument have been presented.