H1 2015 Priorities and Bare-Metal Programming

[Johannes Pfau via Digitalmars-d]

Am Mon, 02 Feb 2015 12:39:28 -0500
schrieb Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy at yahoo.com>:

> On 2/2/15 12:06 PM, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> > Am Mon, 02 Feb 2015 02:49:48 -0800
> > schrieb Walter Bright <newshound2 at digitalmars.com>:
> 
> >> Please try it before deciding it does not work.
> >
> > I guess one ad hominem wasn't enough?
> 
> Sorry, I'm not really vested in this discussion at all, but I don't 
> think you realize what ad hominem means.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
> 
> -Steve
> 

Ad hominem literally means 'to the person'. en/wikipedia reduces that
to character but other definitions (de/wikipedia) include all arguments
against a person instead of to the content of the arguments.

Walter implicitly doubted my qualification in his last reply by
claiming I don't understand how intrinsics work. Here he basically said
I didn't even try to run the code and just making up issues. He's
essentially saying I'm dishonest. He didn't respond to the content of my
arguments. This is clearly not an argument, it's an attack on my
reputation. So how is this not ad hominem?