What is the purpose of your comments? You failed to answer his question, then attack him for asking the question. Consider the two possibilities: a) doing that homework is easy, b) it's hard. If it's easy, you could have just posted the relevant link and be done. If it's hard, then his question is warranted. Either way, your comments add nothing. One can only conclude that you don't actually know how to answer the question. The real question, though, is: why even bother replying?

Also, ReBAR can get complicated as you can see from other responses above. The articles on the web are also not really good as they tend to replicate marketing material and make vague statements about performance, but fail to explain how specifically performance is improved.

> What is the purpose of your comments?

Same as his: to voice my frustration about something on the internet.

Your original comment sure didn't do that. It just gave an incorrect answer.

What exactly was "incorrect" about it? He asked for a purpose and a use-case not an explanation.

> not an explanation

Wrong.

.... It's literally right there:

> I'm still clueless on what the purpose and use-case is for ReBAR

Are you seriously debating this?

They wanted a basic explanation in response to that.

Or to put it differently, I would take the sentence "He asked for a purpose and a use-case not an explanation." and replace the word "not" with a comma.

I quoted the direct response. I have no idea what you're debating.

I'm not sure how to put it simpler.

I agree with "He asked for a purpose and a use-case". (This is what your quote supports.)

I disagree with "not an explanation".

When asking for a purpose and use case, they were asking for an explanation.