3 ms·

So are you talking about error messages or about complexity of borrow-checker? Because I can agree about borrow-checker, but not about error messages (although

So are you talking about error messages or about complexity of borrow-checker? Because I can agree about borrow-checker, but not about error messages (although there is a lot of noise, yes).

masklinn 10y ago
> So are you talking about error messages or about complexity of borrow-checker? Er… both? In separate sections of the comment? > Because I can [not agree] about error messages I've provided a clear example of an issue, are you denying objective reality or are you asserting that providing incorrect suggestions leading beginners in entirely the wrong direction is fine?
- EugeneOZ 10y ago
  So you are trying to add some negative moment about borrow-checker, when my comment is not about borrow-checker, but you need something negative. Cheap trick.
  - masklinn 10y ago
    > So you are trying to add some negative moment about borrow-checker, when my comment is not about borrow-checker, but you need something negative. Cheap trick. Now what the hell are you talking about? I didn't reply to your comment I replied to valarauca1, they're the one who mentioned the borrow checker, if you're unhappy about that whine to them don't include me in your pity party.
    - EugeneOZ 10y ago
      Are you drunk? You are responding to the branch my comment started, comment was about error messages and your response contain words: "And while many Rust messages are OK, one should be careful not to confuse familiarity with Rust's error messages[0] with Rust's error messages being good (being inherently informative and good)." So you will still try to pretend we are not talking about error messages here?
      - masklinn 10y ago
        > Are you drunk? I'd appreciate you not insulting me, as well as you starting to make sense. > You are responding to the branch my comment started I was not, however, replying to your comment. As I already told you I was replying to valarauca1's comment, which is why my own comment was threaded below and in reply to it, and quoted it. > So you will still try to pretend we are not talking about error messages here? I'll repeat my previous query in a new context and with slightly more alarm: what the hell are you talking about? I never "tried to pretend"[0] we were not talking about error messages, my answer[1] to your original query[2] specifically noted the opposite. [0] and would again appreciate not being insulted [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12209010 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12209010 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12208873 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12208873
        EugeneOZ 10y ago
        My question is not more offensive than your "what the hell you are talking about". I regret I don't have "ignore" button for talks like this.

So are you talking about error messages or about complexity of borrow-checker? Because I can agree about borrow-checker, but not about error messages (although there is a lot of noise, yes).

masklinn 10y ago

> So are you talking about error messages or about complexity of borrow-checker? Er… both? In separate sections of the comment? > Because I can [not agree] about error messages I've provided a clear example of an issue, are you denying objective reality or are you asserting that providing incorrect suggestions leading beginners in entirely the wrong direction is fine?

EugeneOZ 10y ago
So you are trying to add some negative moment about borrow-checker, when my comment is not about borrow-checker, but you need something negative. Cheap trick.
- masklinn 10y ago
  > So you are trying to add some negative moment about borrow-checker, when my comment is not about borrow-checker, but you need something negative. Cheap trick. Now what the hell are you talking about? I didn't reply to your comment I replied to valarauca1, they're the one who mentioned the borrow checker, if you're unhappy about that whine to them don't include me in your pity party.
  - EugeneOZ 10y ago
    Are you drunk? You are responding to the branch my comment started, comment was about error messages and your response contain words: "And while many Rust messages are OK, one should be careful not to confuse familiarity with Rust's error messages[0] with Rust's error messages being good (being inherently informative and good)." So you will still try to pretend we are not talking about error messages here?
    - masklinn 10y ago
      > Are you drunk? I'd appreciate you not insulting me, as well as you starting to make sense. > You are responding to the branch my comment started I was not, however, replying to your comment. As I already told you I was replying to valarauca1's comment, which is why my own comment was threaded below and in reply to it, and quoted it. > So you will still try to pretend we are not talking about error messages here? I'll repeat my previous query in a new context and with slightly more alarm: what the hell are you talking about? I never "tried to pretend"[0] we were not talking about error messages, my answer[1] to your original query[2] specifically noted the opposite. [0] and would again appreciate not being insulted [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12209010 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12209010 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12208873 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12208873
      - EugeneOZ 10y ago
        My question is not more offensive than your "what the hell you are talking about". I regret I don't have "ignore" button for talks like this.