"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
news:40201623@news.povray.org...
> In article <40200575$1@news.povray.org> , "Dan P"
> <dan### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
>
> >> So, you can hardly claim more.  The term "other high-performance
> > multimedia
> >> applications" is a rubberband marketing phrase, so I am sure you are
going
> >> to be interpreting it in your favor no matter what I say, so I am just
not
> >> saying anything about it.
> >
> > Your own words demonstrate you know, deep down inside, that you're on
shaky
> > ground here because I'm making an "other high-performance multimedia
>
> Exactly as I predicted...

Why thank you. I do make good points, don't I? I can understand why you
didn't want me to mention that point.

> > application". If you knew more about the DirectX API, you'd see that
games
> > is just one of the applications for it.
>
> If I wouldn't know as much as I do about DirectX, I couldn't know what you
> should, but don't, know about it.

And that would be? Oh wait -- I forgot; you don't back up claims.

> > No, no, no, read it -- words have meanings -- I say SGI isn't clamoring,
I'm
> > not saying other people aren't. However, because there is so much
> > on-the-line for Microsoft, I think DirectX will surpass OpenGL.
>
> At this point in time you still assumed that SGI would be developing
OpenGL
> and you didn't know until I told you that you were wrong there.  So you
> cannot come back later to say what you meant back then was something
> different just because of facts you only learnt about later.

If they aren't developing it, why are they retaining the trademark? Keep in
mind that you don't matter; you're just cheap labor to them so you don't
count, a corporate tool, someone who isn't smart enough to use others like
they do. But, that's my OPINION.

> >> Hmm, lets see, earlier in this thread you claimed "to having that
fflush
> >> there might help us avoid future bugs. Also, even though the C standard
> >> requires this, experience has shown me that not everybody keeps to the
> >> standard when they write their C compilers (see Visual Studio). To me,
> >> flushing the buffer is kindof like closing a file.".
> >
> > Still having to nitpick the details, eh?
>
> No, just that your claim tells me something about your overall knowledge
> about what you are talking about or doing.  What it tells me, that is up
to
> you to guess.

Okay...?

> > STDOUT is buffered. I flushed a buffered stream. fflush is for flushing
a
> > buffered stream. Is it so hard to imagine I'd make that decision in that
> > case, even if the compiler does it itself?
>
> Not "even if".  It cannot not write everything o file upon closing a file.
> Huge difference, at least if you would know what you initially implied by
> claiming it was needed.

I think we're having a language barrier. I'm not perfect in my grammar
(hell, I used "right" for "write" in a past message), but this one has left
me stumped. Are you saying that the program can't write everything out to a
file upon closing a file? Huh?

> > You see, that's why I copy and paste what you say instead of summarizing
it.
> > What I consider "facts"... again, debunk these facts, Thorsten. Debunk
what
> > I have said.
>
> You have demonstrated in this thread that you are either unwilling to
> understand or incapable of understanding the subject being discussed at
all.

I'm still WAITING for your to debunk the simple truths, regardless of how
much you don't like them.

> For the same reason nobody would argue with a two year old child about the
> time it has to go to bed, I am not going to argue with you about any of
your
> so-called "facts".  You just lack the ability to understand the arguments
> because you obviously don't know enough about what I could be telling you.
> Thus, arguing with you would only waste my time.

Uh huh. I don't understand baby-babbling either. Does that mean the baby is
competent? Or does that mean the baby doesn't know what he's babbling on
about? Hell, I'm not even asking you to argue; just acknowledge that you
were wrong in saying that most of what I say doesn't have worth. I'm not
perfect, but pal, neither are you, and I'm surprised you know anything at
all given how much you think you know everything already. Where was your
compulsion to learn?

> The sooner you realize you don't know what you are talking about the
better.
> Right now you are only making a bigger fool out of yourself with every new
> post:  As you probably have noticed, I am not the only person telling you
> this...

No, you are one of two people who are both arrogant (actually, three,
counting me). I happen to still respect Warp, however, since he knows how to
back up his claims instead of trying to deflect like a coward.

> > I don't care about distributing it -- I care about making a
> > patch editor, but if you're going to claim I'm wrong about the facts
> > regarding DirectX, then debunk them. Since the best you can do is
nitpick
> > about fflush, something completely unrelated to the argument,
>
> It is very much related to the argument: It is related to your knowledge
> about programming and computer science in general, because it is such a
> fundamental misconception.  To return the the metaphor of children, if you
> cannot crawl first, it is unlikely would will be able to walk soon.  Much
> less being able to talk about how to walk prior to having done it.  Since
> you don't know the basics, you cannot understand the more complex concepts
> (like DirectX, which is more complex and stdio), and consequently whatever
> you have to say about them will be full of misconceptions.  This in turn
> makes it pointless to argue about it with you.

LOL -- you once again say that I have fundamental misconceptions and then go
on to some empty insult. Man, I'm starting to enjoy this little tiff; you
make me laugh. Unfortunately, since I haven't yet seen you back up your
insults to me, it's just amusing noise. You sure do have your insults down,
I have to say, and I'm not too surprised since when you can't walk the walk,
you gotta talk I guess.

> > I think at
> > this point you're just trying to save face. It must feel awful to have
to
> > grasp like that.
>
> Why does a personal insult that is so out of context belong here?

Oh... oh you feel insulted by that sentence? Have you ever read your own
text as if you wrote it to yourself?

> > As if one misunderstanding (or even several) about a
> > complex field like computer programming makes me incompetent and not to
be
> > listened to.
>
> Because you misunderstand very basic aspects, not even about stdio, but
> about how something like stdio would (not) have to been specified in order
> to allow such arbitrary problems like you suggested would exist.  By pure
> logical reasoning you should have been able to deduce that you claim
cannot
> be correct, and thus you would need to investigate.  That process is
called
> research, and as you didn't do it, the only conclusion can be that you
were
> never properly thought how to research in the field of computer science.
> Consequently, the lack of your ability to deduce the obvious suggests you
> are not competent enough to talk about what you are currently talking
about.
> This in turn makes it pointless for anybody who has proven him or herself
> competent in the same subject area to argue with you about it.

I just love it when people try to sound smart to cover up their
incompetence. Perhaps you can try out for a spot on Fraiser? First off, I
did NOT know that I did not have to fflush stdio and never said I did. In
fact, I thanked Warp for teaching me that. Now, Thorsten, this is called
learning from others and acknowledging their help. Appreciating them. This
is a tough concept for you, I can tell, since everything I say you get
defensive over. What are you hiding, Thorsten? Are you hiding that you don't
know everything either? Or are you worried that I might no something you
don't? So far, I see no evidence to the contrary; just lots of empty,
unsubstantiated claims that I'm some sort of child. But, it is funny though.
I haven't been on a newsgroup like this since the mid-nineties and I forgot
that there are people like you.

> > It must be tiring to be so perfect, Thorsten.
>
> Again, what do these personal insults have to do with anything?

Can you /imagine/ if I answered your postings like you are answering mine?
I'd be saying that every sentence! So, so very fragile you are. It is so
sad. I hope you get better and, although I'm sure nobody will believe this,
I really hope you get better. It must be very difficult and lonely being a
God of All That Is Computer, Thorsten.

If it helps, I forgive you, for I realize you have some growing to do and
when you're ready, I'm here for you.

Post a reply to this message