3 ms·

Glad I could convince you.

lmm 9y ago
Glad you have to make up things that didn't happen to make yourself feel better. Wait, no, not glad. That's really tragic. I hope you're ok.
- colanderman 9y ago
  I don't know, "'Java is call by sharing' would be fine" looks pretty similar to my first comment on this story [1]. I thought we were on the same page. I suggest you re-read the Hacker News guidelines [2] for what constitutes acceptable discourse on this site. Your first comment to me [3] and your most recent comment demonstrate a lack of civility on your part. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16896221 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16896221 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16896569 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16896569
  - lmm 9y ago
    > I don't know, "'Java is call by sharing' would be fine" looks pretty similar to my first comment on this story [1]. I thought we were on the same page. On that much we are. But if we are reducing it to a dichotomy of "call by reference" versus "call by value", as the original article does (which is a simplified model of the space of possibilities, but legitimate; all models are false, some are useful), then "java is call by reference" is the true statement, because java's behaviour is within the sphere of "call by reference" behaviours and very much distinct from the sphere of "call by value" behaviours. > I suggest you re-read the Hacker News guidelines [2] for what constitutes acceptable discourse on this site. Your first comment to me [3] and your most recent comment demonstrate a lack of civility on your part. You first; I've been matching your tone when replying to you, that's all.
    - colanderman 9y ago
      You've personally mocked me twice. I've done no such thing to you or anyone else. Please try to be more civil in the future.
      - lmm 9y ago
        Again, you first. The posts I replied to were just as personal as my responses.

lmm 9y ago

Glad you have to make up things that didn't happen to make yourself feel better. Wait, no, not glad. That's really tragic. I hope you're ok.

colanderman 9y ago
I don't know, "'Java is call by sharing' would be fine" looks pretty similar to my first comment on this story [1]. I thought we were on the same page. I suggest you re-read the Hacker News guidelines [2] for what constitutes acceptable discourse on this site. Your first comment to me [3] and your most recent comment demonstrate a lack of civility on your part. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16896221 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16896221 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16896569 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16896569
- lmm 9y ago
  > I don't know, "'Java is call by sharing' would be fine" looks pretty similar to my first comment on this story [1]. I thought we were on the same page. On that much we are. But if we are reducing it to a dichotomy of "call by reference" versus "call by value", as the original article does (which is a simplified model of the space of possibilities, but legitimate; all models are false, some are useful), then "java is call by reference" is the true statement, because java's behaviour is within the sphere of "call by reference" behaviours and very much distinct from the sphere of "call by value" behaviours. > I suggest you re-read the Hacker News guidelines [2] for what constitutes acceptable discourse on this site. Your first comment to me [3] and your most recent comment demonstrate a lack of civility on your part. You first; I've been matching your tone when replying to you, that's all.
  - colanderman 9y ago
    You've personally mocked me twice. I've done no such thing to you or anyone else. Please try to be more civil in the future.
    - lmm 9y ago
      Again, you first. The posts I replied to were just as personal as my responses.