Re: Clause "with and use"

[Vinzent 'Gadget' Hoefler <ada.rocks@jlfencey.com>]

Russ wrote:

>Vinzent 'Gadget' Hoefler <ada.rocks@jlfencey.com> wrote in message news:<bod0mk$1cg6bn$2@ID-175126.news.uni-berlin.de>...
>
>If you honestly find "+=" to be "unreadable," then I'd say that, yes,
>you are indeed an idiot.

Ok. So we have clarified this.

>I certainly would never hire a programmer who
>has to grapple with the meaning of "+=".

No problem. I don't take jobs where the job description says I have to
use "+=" under all circumstances.

>work to do. Would you hire such a person? If so, I can't imagine how
>you could get any significant amount of work done.

Funny. Have you perhaps noticed that the languages I am using mostly,
simply don't have a "+="?

>Having said that, I don't think
>for a second that anyone here *really* has trouble understanding "+=".

Precisely. I *know* what it is supposed to mean. That doesn't mean, I
am getting much excited from this so that I would like to (mis)use it
over and over again.

>That means that I don't really consider you idiots, I am just baffled
>as to why you insist on portraying yourselves as such. Now, if you
>quote me on this, please keep this entire paragraph intact.

Is that ok so? Does my quoting satisfy you needs?

BTW, someone who can't tell the difference between "I consider a
cosntruct unreadable" and "I can't understand the construct" must be
an idiot, too, because these are truly different things. So this
obviously applies to you, Russ. Or to say it in a different way: "I
consider C unreadable", doesn't mean, that I can't understand it.

Got it, dumbass?


Vinzent.