Re: syntaxic shugar proposition : generic do block [OT]

[askok@...]

You are Right.

My apologies, and just ignore the rant I made.  No rants 
should ever be sent in a haste.

The ground reason was using webmail; my mail client is 
okay, happy, and does support threads.

Sorry.   -asko


On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 04:32:14 -0500
 Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 11:18:02AM +0200, 
> askok@dnainternet.net wrote:
> > PLEASE don't cut out essential information when quoting.
> >
> > The last two messages are not containing what exactly 
> > was 
> > the "generic do block" suggestion, in short.   I tried 
> > to 
> > hunt that message down, in vain (details don't matter). 
> >  Keeping essential details within a mail thread is imho 
> > good manners, and helpful.  Isn't it?  :)
>
> There was nothing wrong with his quoting; it was done 
> properly, keeping
> only the immediate context of his reply and nothing 
> more.  Your reply
> was done poorly by contrast: top-posted, with three 
> whole mails nested
> and no attempt at only keeping the needed quotes. 
> Quotes should not
> keep the entire thread logged, but just enough to give 
> context to the
> reply (as I've done here).
>
> You don't trace back a conversation through quotes, you 
> do that with
> threading.  If your mailer doesn't thread for you, it's 
> time to get a
> better one; it's an important feature for any mailing 
> list use.
>
> --
> Glenn Maynard