:: Re: [DNG] Larcenous mail threads.
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Edward Bartolo
Date:  
To: dng
Subject: Re: [DNG] Larcenous mail threads.
Hi,

<<
About choice of language. I read there are 191 undefined
behaviors in the C99 standard, which means an equal number
of tarpits waiting for the cognitively difficient coder.
>>


ROFLMAO!

I pity your vane attempts to mislead me and destabilise me
psychologically. "Cognitively dificient"?! You seem addressing some
kindergarthen failure. But reality proves otherwise and that is what
counts.

191 undefined behaviours?! LOL. What is that if not bending backwards
to make a point? Then, how does my code work reliably? I had that code
evaluated by an experienced C coder who gave me postive feedback about
it. Who cares about someone bending backwards to make a point that
contradicts reality? Reality is in my favour :D

Yes, I refrain from writing C obfuscated code. It doesn't make sense
with today's powerful computers not to write readable code, that is
why I make an effort to write readable code. Yet, you stupidly
interpret that as "intellectual deficiency".

Your intention is glaringly clear: you are not sincere, you are a dumb
liar and must be treated like one. What counts is feedback from those
who want to really help.

You made my day, ROFLMAO!

Next one, please!