On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 09:25:30 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:

> On 4/3/13 11:24 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 14:42:12 -0400, Walter Bright
>> <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/3/2013 9:49 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>>>> +1
>>>
>>> Stylistic nit:
>>>
>>> When writing a one-liner post like this, please do not quote the
>>> entire preceding post, especially if it is long. We have great forum
>>> software, and the newsreaders as well are great at navigating the
>>> threads.
>>
>> I couldn't disagree more. The given +1 had 4 lines of context. There was
>> some straggling text after it, but this was only an additional 5 lines.
>
> I'm with Walter. The top context was fine for that message. The bottom was not seeing as the poster had nothing to say about it. Deleting the bottom is good common courtesy.
>
> Walter himself used to leave vast amounts of trailing context in our communication, and it saved me significant time when he started to consistently trim it. With trailing chaff, essentially every reader needs to scroll down to find "is there anything more this guy wanted to add"? Some don't even insert an empty line.

Mac mail fixed this problem for me.  All previously received text is folded out, no need to look at it.

>> My newsreader highlights replied-to text in different colors depending
>> on the level of indent. I can immediately pick out new replies, and if I
>> don't want to read the re-posted stuff, I don't have to, unless I want
>> to for context.
>
> Mine too, but that doesn't make the problem go away.

It doesn't?  It pretty much fixes it for me.  I can see exactly what the new text is via it's color.

>> Newsreaders are known not to thread things properly, and some people's
>> posts don't thread properly ANYWHERE. Context is important.
>
> Yes, just not trailing chaff.

I agree, it's not necessary.  But it's not worth a public scolding either.

>>> Not to pick on you, but I see this a lot here from many of our
>>> participants and finally felt compelled to speak up!
>>
>> I find posts that are solely about how you didn't "post properly"
>> annoying. Kind of like compulsively telling someone they didn't use
>> correct grammar (for which I have to fight my instincts in order to
>> remain married). Sorry, I had to say something ;)
>
> Such posts are good because netiquette is not as widespread and as agreed upon as grammar.

Such posts are annoying precisely because there is no agreed upon netiquette.  There is no "Right way" to post.

It's actually kind of ironic that grammar is NOT policed here as much, simply because we all agree to post in English, and that's not always the author's native language.

-Steve

On 4/2/13 4:59 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 4/2/13 6:04 AM, bearophile wrote:
>> Jonas Drewsen:
>>> Article about the expressiveness of languages with D included as one
>>> of the contestants.
>>>
>>> http://redmonk.com/dberkholz/2013/03/25/programming-languages-ranked-by-expressiveness/
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I think D is quite expressive:
>> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/zdhfpftodxnvbpwvklcv@forum.dlang.org
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
>
> I meant to comment on this - it's a terrific walkthrough. I think
> bearophile should convert it into a blog post/article. I think reddit
> would love it.
>
> The suggestions included (such as enumerate()) are also very worth
> looking into.

Pinging bearophile on this again - do you want to adapt this into a blog entry? It may be worth posting the link to reddit as is, but one adaptation pass for a larger audience shouldn't hurt.

Let us know!

Andrei

Andrei Alexandrescu:

>> The suggestions included (such as enumerate()) are also very worth
>> looking into.

I think the enumerate() was discussed mostly elsewhere.


> Pinging bearophile on this again - do you want to adapt this into a blog entry? It may be worth posting the link to reddit as is, but one adaptation pass for a larger audience shouldn't hurt.
>
> Let us know!

Thank you for your interest. I like to write articles, but there are significant problems related to that post:
- It's a soup of very different things;
- It suggests things like stream fusion that I think aren't yet discussed in the D community;
- I think it's not good for consumption outside the D community, it focuses on details mostly important for the development of D/Phobos;
- I think some of its contents are half cooked and need some more of my reflection;
- I do not like to show a text two times.

Bye,
bearophile

On Friday, 5 April 2013 at 01:55:06 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu:
>> Pinging bearophile on this again - do you want to adapt this into a blog entry? It may be worth posting the link to reddit as is, but one adaptation pass for a larger audience shouldn't hurt.
>>
>> Let us know!
>
> Thank you for your interest. I like to write articles, but there are significant problems related to that post:
> - It's a soup of very different things;
> - It suggests things like stream fusion that I think aren't yet discussed in the D community;
> - I think it's not good for consumption outside the D community, it focuses on details mostly important for the development of D/Phobos;
> - I think some of its contents are half cooked and need some more of my reflection;
> - I do not like to show a text two times.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

I just wanted to say that I also liked the article and I understand why the others would want you to repost it. I think the strengths outweigh the weaknesses you mention, but I do understand nto wanting to show the thing twice.

On Tuesday, 2 April 2013 at 23:55:19 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> On Tuesday, 2 April 2013 at 17:33:13 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 4/2/2013 2:53 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
>>> I also have a strong feeling that LOC per commit reflects too many different
>>> factors to be really reliable as a comparison, e.g. it probably depends quite
>>> strongly on the age/maturity of a project, the rate of development, and other
>>> factors.
>>
>> Consider also that this LOC numbers are not lines of code - they're also lines of comments! D's ddoc encourages writing considerably more lines of comments than C does.
>
> While I don't know what this specific report used, but comments are generally factored out of LOC and have their own count.
>
> I usually find the build in unittests to cause more skew since those are counted as LOC.

He certainly didn't factor out comments for all languages, meaning that he didn't do it at all.

On Wednesday, 3 April 2013 at 18:42:14 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 4/3/2013 9:49 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>> +1
>
> Stylistic nit:
>
> When writing a one-liner post like this, please do not quote the entire preceding post, especially if it is long. We have great forum software, and the newsreaders as well are great at navigating the threads.
>

+1

I hate it to have to scroll down just to read a one liner that nearly adds nothing to a long post.

It gives an impression of laziness from the part of the author.

On Thursday, 4 April 2013 at 18:00:27 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>
> Mac mail fixed this problem for me.  All previously received text is folded out, no need to look at it.
>

So there is a lot of visual noise for nothing, and you like it ?
And what if one uses the web forum, like me ? Or Thunderbird ? Do we need to buy a mac and use your newsreader ?

Seriously, the netiquette *demands* that you trim previous mails to keep only the necessary.
If everybody was doing like you, we would end up having posts hundreds of lines long, most of which being noise.

> It won’t tell you how readable the resulting code is (Hello, lambda functions) or how long it takes to write it (APL anyone?), so it’s not a measure of maintainability or productivity.

Did I get it right, that expressiveness means trading maintainability for keystroke saving?

On 4/4/13 10:36 PM, Zach the Mystic wrote:
> On Friday, 5 April 2013 at 01:55:06 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu:
>>> Pinging bearophile on this again - do you want to adapt this into a
>>> blog entry? It may be worth posting the link to reddit as is, but one
>>> adaptation pass for a larger audience shouldn't hurt.
>>>
>>> Let us know!
>>
>> Thank you for your interest. I like to write articles, but there are
>> significant problems related to that post:
>> - It's a soup of very different things;
>> - It suggests things like stream fusion that I think aren't yet
>> discussed in the D community;
>> - I think it's not good for consumption outside the D community, it
>> focuses on details mostly important for the development of D/Phobos;
>> - I think some of its contents are half cooked and need some more of
>> my reflection;
>> - I do not like to show a text two times.
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
>
> I just wanted to say that I also liked the article and I understand why
> the others would want you to repost it. I think the strengths outweigh
> the weaknesses you mention, but I do understand nto wanting to show the
> thing twice.

I, too, understand that, with the amendment that it's an unwarranted concern. I used to worry about that, too (e.g. not give the same talk twice) until I understood that the overlap in audiences is very small, and the people comprising the overlap understand and approve of the reasons for repeating.

Andrei

On Fri, 05 Apr 2013 02:16:02 -0400, SomeDude <lovelydear@mailmetrash.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, 4 April 2013 at 18:00:27 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>
>> Mac mail fixed this problem for me.  All previously received text is folded out, no need to look at it.
>>
>
> So there is a lot of visual noise for nothing, and you like it ?

I like that I don't have to deal with it.  I also don't have to deal with it if the person deletes the replied-to text.  In other words, it takes all forms, and gives me what I need to read.

> And what if one uses the web forum, like me ? Or Thunderbird ? Do we need to buy a mac and use your newsreader ?

No, I'm just stating that I don't have that problem.  That is with email though, mac mail doesn't do newsgroups.  It's not a solution for you, it's just that I realized I don't have to ever deal with this anymore, which I hadn't thought about.

> Seriously, the netiquette *demands* that you trim previous mails to keep only the necessary.

There is no technical requirement for this.  I don't think any of this would be grounds for banning here, so as long as you get your point across, I don't see a problem.

There is the notion that if you make your posts annoying to read, less people will read them.  But for this specific instance, I found 9 lines of context not to be a burden, even though 5 lines were unneeded.

> If everybody was doing like you, we would end up having posts hundreds of lines long, most of which being noise.

I typically trim down my posts to the relevant information.  I do it because it makes my point come across much better.

-Steve