Here is one, i will not go into others:
>>how did you jump from C to all programming languages, in the context of that statement? I did not say anything of the kind.
>Simply by taking further steps in the same direction.
but i did not ask you to take further steps in the same direction, so that you could twist my words.
i limited myself to C and closely related topics, like D, C++, Walter, and Andrei - related languages and people involved with them.
don't try to twist my words, as you appear to have done above.
yes, once i find people talking fake or not understanding, it is a waste of my time, so i will not engage further with you.
I took them to paint an example, so that my argument could be better understood. The example was clearly presented as my own; I have twisted no words of yours from what I can see, and I most certainly wasn't trying to.
> i limited myself to C and closely related topics […]
Yes, while the submission is about Aro, not C, hence the disagreement.
> […] so i will not engage further with you.
Thank you, I suppose.
Simply by taking further steps in the same direction. The submission is about Aro, and therefore comments about Aro are on-topic. By your own stated logic, Aro is a C compiler, and therefore comments about other C compilers are also on-topic. One could then go on to say that C compilers in turn pertain to C, and C in turn is a programming language, therefore rendering all comments about programming on-topic under a submission about Aro.
Granted, the example is a bit of a hyperbole, and I doubt anyone would really jump that far. But I find your assertion that a submission about a program (in this instance Aro) renders comments about all other programs of the same kind (in this instance C compilers for other languages) on-topic to be much in the same vein.
> I can't waste my time explaining things multiple times to different people who don't get it, when others have got it.
> maybe check my answers to the other people in this subthread, if you are that interested, for what is such a trivially obvious matter.
I have, of course, read your other comments, but haven’t found anything that would help me understand or accept your argument (assuming that is what I'm supposed to ‘get’). I suppose it's not so ‘trivially obvious’ to me. Don't feel obliged to elaborate any further if you feel that's a waste of your time, though. Good luck!