Can some explain plz. Basic uses a C++ wrapper.

[Mabden]

Applying Kill Filter now, (Action=Delete) for Author: Mabden

So what?! Who the **** are YOU, asshole?!

 

[Rick Rothstein]

Applying Kill Filter now, (Action=Delete) for Author: Mabden

So what?! Who the **** are YOU, asshole?!

Apparently, someone with a lot more brains than you.

Oh yeah, you can skip posting your broken-record response to my comment.
Let's assume I already know you were going to do that and let it go at
that.

Rick

 

[Leslie A Rhorer]

H Haven't any of you ever read "Gulliver's Travels"?
a
e " > In message <[email protected]>, Norm Cook
' u > >
l > >a i > >> "Thomas Matthews"
n v > >> message y e > >> : Intermouse wrote:
r > >> : > The ocx was written in C++.
o ' > >> :
f s > >> : 1. Don't top-post.y T > >> While you may not care for top-posting, others such as myself
find it much
o r > >> easier to read.
u a >
v > >Concur. I hate having to scroll to the bottom of every message
to see
e e > >what may or may not be some profound response.
v l >
e s > Then _trim_ the junk. Just keep enough to maintain sequence and
context.
r " >
? > See?
r >
e > --
a > Richard Herring
d
Haven't any of you ever read "Gulliver's Travels"?

 

[Richard Herring]

Haven't any of you ever read "Gulliver's Travels"?

The Lilliputians didn't have the benefit of the fine c.l.c++ FAQ:

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/how-to-post.html#faq-5.4

 

[Michael B. Johnson]

The Lilliputians didn't have the benefit of the fine c.l.c++ FAQ:

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/how-to-post.html#faq-5.4

LOL!

But seriously, if you've been following a thread and your news reader
provides this threading capability to you, wouldn't you have the
context /already/ in mind when someone top posts?

But...enough already, I suppose.
_______________________
Michael B. Johnson

 

[Mike Williams]

. . . if you've been following a thread and your news reader
provides this threading capability to you, wouldn't you have
the context /already/ in mind when someone top posts?

Depends. I usually have my messages grouped by thread, but I also set it to
hide "read" messages (much easier to deal only with new ones). So often a
message can arrive that deals with a thread a few days old or more and I
find it really useful to have just two or three lines at the top containing
a very brief outline of the appropriate part of the subject matter. This is
particularly useful when a thread deals with multiple questions and the
newly arrived post deals with only part of the answer. The only thing I
really don't like is when the "top post" message contains the entire
original post (and often a lot more besides) and you have to wade through
lots and lots of stuff just to get to the current post. If I have to scroll
through more than a dozen or so lines of top post I usually go no further
and ignore the post completely (unless it is something I am particularly
interested in). It's a matter of personal preference, of course, but I like
newsgroup messages (and women!) to have at least a little bit at the top ;-)

Mike

 

[J French]

Depends. I usually have my messages grouped by thread, but I also set it to
hide "read" messages (much easier to deal only with new ones). So often a
message can arrive that deals with a thread a few days old or more and I
find it really useful to have just two or three lines at the top containing
a very brief outline of the appropriate part of the subject matter.

<snip>

I have a similar problem, quite often the reply to an original post
turns up well before I get the 'question'

If the replier has over assiduosly snipped the question, then I find
myself having to 'guess the question' from the answer
- it can be annoying

But it can be just as annoying getting 200 lines of previous posts,
and just
'Thanks'

at the end.

 

[Leslie A Rhorer]

LOL!

I thought the thread deviation was worth a chuckle, and hopefully not
offensive to anyone.

But seriously, if you've been following a thread and your news reader
provides this threading capability to you, wouldn't you have the

It depends on how complex the thread is, and how closely the posters

context /already/ in mind when someone top posts?

But...enough already, I suppose.

OK. Actually, one of my favorite methods of reply posting is as you see
here. I especially employed it back in the old FIDONet days when debating
in political fora or responding in the Tech or Science echoes. I would
delete the chaff, and respond to each point in a separate section.

_______________________
Michael B. Johnson

Leslie A Rhorer

 

[stu]

I know this is a repeat, but... > > > Your question hasn't
personally, I like to "side post"; > > > anything to do with C,
that way, those reading the thread > > > as far as I see...
can read my answer and follow > >
along with the original text. Of > > 1. Don't top-post.
course, this takes a little more >
arranging the original thread; but, > While you may not care for
as you can see, it makes for a > top-posting, others such as
much better reading experience. > myself find it much easier to
<g> > read

Rick

aaaaH, aaaaH, aaaaH!

!Right group posters dysfunctional the is This

"Putting the fun back in Dysfunctional since 1957" (tm)(r)(c)