Richard,

Russell Penney wrote:
> Richard, 
> 	I wanted to give an opinion about your emails. The opinion is
> "thanks".

I second this.

It takes time to read your mails, but it takes a lot more time for you
to write them!

For me recently the Set/hash discussion was illuminating, especially the
point, that a Set shouldn't contain itself in the world of actual
programming languages. My first thought about this has been
mathematically (where a Set may include itself, if I remember
correctly). After being rembered of it's not a good idea to try to put a
Set in itself in actual programming languages, the point has been very
clear for me and hopefully others, too!

If people don't like your exhaustive mails, they don't have to read
them; but my experience is, that you will be remembered of important
things, which shouldn't be forgotten, or newly learning them.

Thanks for your work!


Greetings
Stephan

> I have learnt a lot about the fundamentals of Smalltalk in recent
> weeks especially the #= vs. #== discussions. It finally made sense to me
> after reading your emails.
> 
> I must admit I would hate to be on the receiving end of one of your
> discussions :)   (But I would learn something)
> 
> Just my 0.02c
> 
> Russell
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:squeak-dev-
>>bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Brian Rice
>>Sent: Wednesday, 23 June 2004 4:31 PM
>>To: Richard A. O'Keefe
>>Cc: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
>>Subject: Re: [ENH] CharacterTimes-rsb
>>
>>I suppose you deserve a better reply than my latest. Basically after
>>the long rhetorical diarrhea about Hebrew, I was fairly revolted, and
>>had a difficult time even looking at the several pages following it. I
>>also do not particularly care for your interpretation or selection of
>>operator. It can be whatever I like, because you are not here to write
>>code; you're here to debate.
>>
>>You may be wise and experienced, but this is not a debate hall or a
>>lecture hall at a university, and it is not polite to reply to every
>>sentence with a paragraph or a full thesis.
>>
>>To address your questions: my presence on the Squeak list as a Slate
>>author is that Slate is intended to encompass every existing Squeak
>>role at some point. Slate has to abide by Squeak philosophies and
>>support everything that Squeakers want to do, simply because I want to
>>do all those things and believe that Squeak goes about them in entirely
>>the wrong way. I actually believe that Slate is exactly what Squeak
>>should be focussing on for the far future, in Alan Kay's terms and even
>>in practice. Also, I'd be a fool not to be here to record improvements
>>here and adapt them to Slate or at least note the contrast.
>>
>>Everything else, I could care less about. You gave the full code for an
>>idiom I do not care for. I rejected it. copied: means
>>concatenatedTimes: so it is a totally unsuitable selector. I shall use
>>concatenatedTimes: and also implement copySize: in the manner alluded
>>to.
>>
>>As for my reaction, perhaps it would not have happened, and I would
>>have read the content more thoroughly and with higher regard and
>>precision of understanding if I didn't have to wade through so bloody
>>much of it.
>>
>>--
>>Brian T. Rice
>>LOGOS Research and Development
>>http://tunes.org/~water/
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Stephan Rudlof (sr at evolgo.de)
   "Genius doesn't work on an assembly line basis.
    You can't simply say, 'Today I will be brilliant.'"
    -- Kirk, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4731.3