shared - i need it to be useful

[Manu]

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 12:50 AM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/21/2018 5:54 PM, Manu wrote:
> > Would you please respond to my messages, and specifically, respond to
> > the code that I presented to you in response to your broken example.
> > Or any of my earlier fragments throughout this thread. I've shared
> > quite a few, and so far, nobody has ever produced a criticism of any
> > of my fragments. They've just been skipped over.
>
> That's just the problem. You've posted 62 messages so far in this thread, and
> then there's all the ones Nicholas posted.

I sent it twice... again just a short while ago right before this
one... but you responded to this one and not that one O_o

> Trying to assemble the "earlier fragments throughout this thread" is not
> practical for readers, and the endless nature of this thread is ample evidence
> for it. The n.g. is a place to discuss a proposal, not the proposal itself.
>
> This change is definitely merits an actual proposal DIP, so that one is assured
> of seeing the complete proposal, rationale, examples, etc., in one document, as
> well as not being distracted by sidebars, thread drift, and mistakes. This
> document can evolve with corrections and clarifications from the discussion, and
> anyone can get up to speed quickly by just reading the latest version of it.

Okay, but I still want you to respond to my corrections of your
program, which were in direct response to you... twice.

>  > But the one aimed directly at your own most recent sample program
>  > addresses your program directly.
>
> My most recent sample program was a direct criticism of one of your fragments,
> so please don't say "nobody has ever ...". I do understand your frustration at
> finding it hard to get your point across, but the problem at least for me is
> trying to mine it from nuggets scattered across 62 posts. Mine it, refine it,
> cast it into an ingot, then present it as a DIP.

I posted it, twice... 2 messages, back to back, and you're responding
to this one, and not that one. I'll post it again...