[oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] scgmille@xxxxxx (28 Oct 2003 01:28 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] Bradd W. Szonye (28 Oct 2003 04:25 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] scgmille@xxxxxx (28 Oct 2003 04:54 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] Bradd W. Szonye (28 Oct 2003 05:33 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] scgmille@xxxxxx (28 Oct 2003 14:10 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] scgmille@xxxxxx (28 Oct 2003 15:11 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] Bradd W. Szonye (28 Oct 2003 18:01 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] scgmille@xxxxxx (28 Oct 2003 18:29 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] Bradd W. Szonye (28 Oct 2003 19:05 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] scgmille@xxxxxx (28 Oct 2003 19:42 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] Bradd W. Szonye (28 Oct 2003 19:59 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] Tom Lord (28 Oct 2003 19:59 UTC)
Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] Tom Lord (28 Oct 2003 20:02 UTC)

Re: [oleg@pobox.com: Interface view of dictionaries] Bradd W. Szonye 28 Oct 2003 19:05 UTC

xxxxxx@freenetproject.org wrote:
>>> If you don't trust me, construct a counter-example.

> Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
>> That's not how design/code review works.

> Tough.  That is the only way you'll convince me of a flaw.  No amount
> of positive proof through implementation is likely to satisfy you.

That's nice. I suggest that you take your proposal to a venue where:

1. The burden of proof is on the reviewers rather than the author, and
2. Designers are not required to support their proposals with concrete
   implementations.

As a courtesy, please let me know what that venue is, so that I can
avoid it.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd