Who favors the current D1 situation?

[Janice Caron]

On 08/03/2008, Kris <foo at bar.com> wrote:
>  I believe there's at least one beauty about how Tango is written by amateurs or ignorant fools, or something, all based merely upon the existence of CamelCase in module names.

I'm not quite sure where you're going with this, but "Tango is written
by amateurs or ignorant fools" has never been said by anyone, so far
as I am aware, and certainly not by me.

Last time I called strawman on that very point, Jeff Nowakowski had to
dig up the exact quote to end the conversation. I was rather hoping
that that would be the end of it for all time. Aparently not.

So for the record ... /again/ ... this is what I claimed, way back in
September 2007: I claimed that my first impression upon reading the
Tango documentation was that the decision to deliberately violate the
D style guide had been a petty decision. In the same post I apologised
in case that came across as contentious. I tend to assume that writers
(even writers of documentation) appreciate feedback about what sort of
first impressions their work conveys, so I assumed that the feedback
would be welcome. In subsequent posts I went on to add that the core
body of code in Tango is excellent.

(Feedback for any of my own documentation is /encouraged/, by the way.
If it sucks, or gives any misleading impression, tell me).

So, Kris, you /know/ that I don't think that "Tango is written by
amateurs or ignorant fools", and that I have not ever made that claim,
so please, please, please let us put this to rest once and for all.
Every time you retell this, you exaggerate upon your previous
retelling, and it was already inaccurate the last time.

This got old a long time ago. Can we drop it?