1. Re: Forum Only (Was Re: Improvement that Everybody Will Agree With:
cchris005 wrote:
>
> [snipped]
>
> >
> > This is yet another argument for the forum style (bangs head on nearest
> > brick wall). WHO USES OFF LINE READING ANYMORE? Who needs the digest
> > mailed
> > to them? How many other languages use the list form, rather than the
> > forum
> > form. (I think Chris Bensler has missed a couple of posts because of
> > Topica lag)
> >
>
> I wish some email digest being available. Unfortunately, only Topica has
> provided it so far, and it has coughed digests on a irregular basis
> since Dec 1 or so.
>
> RDS? When will you provide this facility (group posts in emails: last 10
> (say), or last in the prev 12h (say), whichever takes place first)?
>
> I like to look at posts from office. The computers are in a network
> behind various security filters. As a result, getting individual emails
> would cause the sender to be blocked as spam. And I don't have any RSS
> facility - opening the rss link displays an xml file. I think I'm not
> the only one who consults the posts from work, but donesn't own the
> computer so as to allow large emmailing or enabling RSS.
>
> The web interface is still available. But I have to "next" from one post
> to the other (takes time), can't glance at a group of posts fast (which
> I can with digest headers), and it is very difficult to pick up where
> you left when there's a large amount of posts in a short period of time
> - and it is precisely in this circumstance that you need to follow stuff
> closely.
>
>
> > Oh well, soap box rant over. I have the utmost respect for the above
> > mentioned
> > developers. But sometimes you're just so ...... pedantic!
> >
>
> I never found a pedantic post here, apart perhaps from a couple of guys
> never seen since like 3 years. What do you mean?
>
Hi, I try not to prolong these discussions too far, but since I've been asked a
specific question ;
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/pedantic
quote "pedantic - marked by a narrow focus on or display of learning especially
its trivial aspects"
The meaning I used it - smaller and smaller points seemed to be argued /
discussed, for what I felt were prolonged periods. I certainly had no reference
ostentatiousness in mind!
Chris
> > >
> > > Do we have anyone in favour of the chk_include then ?
> >
> > No, but I would be in favour of an internal version()
> >
>
> Me too. But the function must return something when given a file without
> the info.
>
> > Chris Burch
> >
> > ps - does this mean I have to rename some of my own CB_?????() functions?
>
> CChris
>
> --
>
> cchris005 at fastmail.fm
>
> --
> <a href="http://www.fastmail.fm">http://www.fastmail.fm</a> - Does exactly
> what it says on the tin
>
>
http://euallegro.wikispaces.com
http://members.aol.com/chriscrylex/euphoria.htm
http://uboard.proboards32.com/
http://members.aol.com/chriscrylex/EUSQLite/eusql.html
