Mon Sep 19 17:53:47 CEST 2016
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:05:52PM +1200, wrote:
> I have been taken to task in private e-mail by someone
> who detected in my response to the "list comprehension puzzle"
> both "aggressive sarcasm" and "undisguised contempt".
> In all honesty, no sarcasm was intended. (A sarcastic response
> would not have pointed to the Erlang reference manual.) Nor
> was any contempt whatsoever involved. I should not have to
> reassure long-term readers of this mailing list that these
> attitudes my critic claimed to detect were entirely imaginary.
> However, it shows that it was possible for people to misread
> what I wrote. If anyone took offence at the message I
> *meant* to be helpful, please accept my assurance that no
> offence was intended and my unreserved apology for the offence.
I would like to add my name to the list of people who are very happy
with the contributions that you make to this mailing list.
P.S. Fortune cookie random and apposite :-)
First law of debate:
Never argue with a fool. People might not know the difference.
More information about the erlang-questions