> hi Space, Hey, > i do not care about this discussion in general > i would not want to enter into a discussion with you
So it's up to you, isn't it? Should I invite you? Or maybe anyone else should? I don't know you and don't care about your existence (as you said, I don't mean any disrespect, just a fact). I would say that in my experience whether you or anyone else enters a discussion depends on whether you have anything in mind, on the subject and appropriate arguments, or not. Interestingly, but nobody in this and adjacent thread who set him(-her)self against generics didn't attempt any personal attack. And in this thread you're 3rd person who have nothing to say in general, but a lot to say about me. =) Not knowing me at all, even my name. So have you read my comment, do you have any arguments regarding my point that most of people here who are pro-generics don't understand what *real world* problems are and not facing this class of problems? Lets' talk about this. All of this (copied): > > "runtime type-casting" > > "type safety something" > > "boilerplate" > > "amount of code" > > "benefit something" > > "greatly simplified" (for whom?) translates to not more than just a simple implication that "generics are better". As simple as that. So the problems people trying to "solve" are a kind of very general, imaginary and ephemeral things like: "generics are better than runtime" "generics are better than interfaces" "generics produces less code which is better" "generics produces smarter code" (Clear is better than clever? No, never heard!) <nobody told but I'm expecting this> "generics gives better performance" etc and so one so forth. Which are just not correct. *Not* *a* *single* *real* *world* *problem* in any of presented case. Did I miss one? Please point on it! So why shouldn't I or anyone else say it's a *bullshit* after all (but I didn't)? After all your attacks? And all you can say: "i would not want to enter into a discussion with you based on the general tone of your messages, regardless of argument or subject ". Ok, do not. четверг, 31 декабря 2020 г. в 17:58:24 UTC+3, mb0: > hi Space, > > i do not care about this discussion in general and learned to trust the > go developers to be thoughtful and reasonable. > > i wouldn't write this normally, but in case you are not aware it might > actually help: i did read the last couple of your messages to this list > again and came to the conclusion that i would not want to enter into a > discussion with you based on the general tone of your messages, > regardless of argument or subject. > > i don't mean any disrespect. the advice by Tyler is well meaning and > will certainly be good to follow generally and by everyone: > > "I think your arguments would gain quite a bit more traction on this > list if you presented them in a more respectful way." > > a good exercise would be to review your messages from a different point > of view. read them as if addressed to you and decide whether you would > want to reply yourself. > > anyway, have a happy new year everyone! > > On 31.12.20 13:55, Space A. wrote: > > Hi, > > ok, so please read it finally and tell which point exactly you think was > > against CoC and in what of my messages and in which exact thread, but do > > not put my words out of context. And explain why you responded just now, > > and to my message to a person who obviously *violated* its terms by > > aggressively turning to my personality. > > > > Do you protect this aggressive behavior just because you pro-generics > > and silently hate everything I will say (and me personally)? Because if > > you do, it's quite stupid. But I hope it's not. > > > > > > чт, 31 дек. 2020 г. в 07:51, Tyler Compton <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>>: > > > > Space A, > > > > So switching from subject to my personality and telling me what > > I should and what shouldn't, to whom to listen, and what to read > > is something in line with "code of conduct" which you appeal as > > the argument of last resort? > > > > > > I've seen how you carry yourself on this list, and you really should > > read the code of conduct. I think your arguments would gain quite a > > bit more traction on this list if you presented them in a more > > respectful way. > > > > On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 3:47 PM Space A. <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Nice. > > > > > You should listen to people who have been doing this much > > longer than you > > Thanks, are you sure you know for how long I've been doing > > *this* to be able to compare? > > > before discarding all their points as "bullshit" > > Have *you* actually read and listened because this is not what > > I've said? > > > and you should probably review the community code of conduct > > So switching from subject to my personality and telling me what > > I should and what shouldn't, to whom to listen, and what to read > > is something in line with "code of conduct" which you appeal as > > the argument of last resort? > > > > > > This was actually my first comment on this particular topic. So > > yea, I read and listened before replying. I could have replied > > to everyone and explained in detail, but I value the time of my > > opponents. And my own time, tbh. > > > > > > чт, 31 дек. 2020 г. в 00:03, David Riley <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>>: > > > > This topic has shown little other than that a few people > > here are unwilling to consider points of view other than > > their own and declare that very real problems are not real. > > > > You should listen to people who have been doing this much > > longer than you have before discarding all their points as > > "bullshit", and you should probably review the community > > code of conduct. > > > > If you've got nothing constructive to contribute, why bother? > > > > > > - Dave > > > > > > > On Dec 30, 2020, at 3:53 PM, Space A. > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > "runtime type-casting" > > > "type safety something" > > > "boilerplate" > > > "amount of code" > > > "benefit something" > > > "greatly simplified" (for whom?) > > > > > > This topic has clearly shown that most people pro-generic > > have no *real world* problems that they struggle to solve, > > yet most of them don't even understand what *real world* > > problems are. > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the > > Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from > > it, send an email to [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CADKwOTek6rrfmMziuj5poy4hAZJ%3DHXsyp-FB96RdUvZ%2BncoJYA%40mail.gmail.com > > > < > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CADKwOTek6rrfmMziuj5poy4hAZJ%3DHXsyp-FB96RdUvZ%2BncoJYA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > > > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "golang-nuts" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > > an email to [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CADKwOTeXFD8WoGeS4H1OwXnu5N0f-LqcUBGJmUYiCj3BWACkTA%40mail.gmail.com > > > < > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CADKwOTeXFD8WoGeS4H1OwXnu5N0f-LqcUBGJmUYiCj3BWACkTA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/3e2e3c21-7f70-4468-8f2a-624ded846456n%40googlegroups.com.
