From: bc@freeuk.com   
      
   On 29/10/2025 01:48, Keith Thompson wrote:   
   > bart  writes:   
   >> On 28/10/2025 21:59, Keith Thompson wrote:   
   >>> bart  writes:   
   >>>> On 28/10/2025 02:35, Janis Papanagnou wrote:   
   >>>>> On 27.10.2025 16:11, bart wrote:   
   >>> [...]   
   >>>>>> If speed wasn't an issue then we'd all be using easy dynamic languages   
   >>>>> Huh? - Certainly not.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> *I* would! That's why I made my scripting languages as fast and   
   >>>>    capable as possible, so they could be used for more tasks.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> However, if I dare to suggest that even one other person in the world   
   >>>> might also have the same desire, you'd say that I can't possibly know   
   >>>> that.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> And yet here you are: you say 'certainly not'. Obviously *you* know   
   >>>> everyone else's mindset!   
   >>> I'll give this one more try.   
   >>> This kind of thing makes it difficult to communicate with you.   
   >>   
   >> You're talking to the wrong guy. It's JP who's difficult to talk to.   
   >   
   > No, I'm talking to you.  It turns out that was a mistake.   
   >   
   > My post was **only** about your apparent confusion about a single   
   > statement, quoted above.  I wasn't talking about JP personally, or about   
   > any of his other interactions with you.  I explained in great detail   
   > what I was referring to.  You ignored it.   
   >   
   > You seem unwilling or unable to focus on one thing.   
   >   
   >> He (I assume) always dismisses every single one of my arguments out of hand:   
   >>   
   >> Build speed is never a problem - ever. The speed of any language   
   >> implemention is never a concern either.   
   >   
   > And here you are putting words in other people's mouths.   
   >   
   > I think you goal is to argue, not to do anything that might result in   
   > agreement or learning.   
      
   Again, I think you're mixing up me and JP, whose only goal is to   
   contradict and refute everything I say.   
      
   I say: X has some problem; Y doesn't have that problem. This is about   
   approaches to building software.   
      
   He refuses to acknowledge that X has any problem whatsoever, or shrugs   
   off the importance   
      
   He refuses to accept that Y is a solution, because I devised it and he   
   looks down upon me because he considers himself superior.   
      
      
   He refuses to accept Z (which I haven't devised) for other reasons (to   
   avoid admitting that I might have a point).   
      
   The problems are X are real and I think you have acknowledged them. But   
   I have decades of experience of viable alternatives so I think I can   
   offer an educated, alternative opinion   
      
   JP I don't think has offered any better alternatives has not devised any   
   that I am aware. So he is just and user of such software and not a creator.   
      
   This is rather frustrating to me. You seem to be on his side, and don't   
   care about X versus Y either.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)