If I thought it was a problem, I might have thought to investigate it before hand so toxic people wouldn't attack for having a conversation with people about a weird thing I saw and wondering about it. Is this a friendly place or is this a rule-bound hostile place where people can't pose ill-defined symptoms.
Its a friendly place where reasonable people can be reasonable, even if the symptoms are ill defined, minimal demonstration code is nice, appreciated, and wanted,
but no, its not absolutely required, which is why I did not comment on your original posting
If I needed any help debugging a program, I might consider that advice, but more often than not, I'm posing ideas or questions that don't involve code -- something I want other people's opinion on or to bounce ideas or thoughts off of.
Thats cool, its why I didn't directly address your original post
Sorry, but claiming I should have followed a writeup on asking a question about a behavior I saw, but had no test case for until another anonmonk tried to shutdown discussion about whether or not it might be a bug and gave an unrelated example to prove it, is a bit rule-bound and rigid. So far anonmonk as tried to shut down discussion, then said that code that reproduced the problem wasn't a valid minimal test case (like anyone claimed it was). And then whined about the question not being posed in a way that their rules applied.
I don't believe so. Andal tried to replicate what you were talking about and thought he found a bug in warnings. I clarified for andal that his code doesn't demonstrate a bug in warnings.
At this point you posted some code and lots of words for me to consider :) and I didn't see it as reasonable to have to install a few of your modules , to demonstrate a bug in warnings; This is all after you wrote UPDATED, mostly solved
So I'm still interested in seeing this bug in warnings with a shorter code example; If you're interested, hey its cool; If you're not interested, I won't call you toxic
Is the anon-function ever used for anything useful, or just to harass and generate toxic comments?
I thought my observations and clarification for andal were useful
99.999999% of the time it isn't used to harass or generate toxic comment
I also believe in this case the comments didn't constitute toxic harassment
Seems to me it's being abused and given the nature of this being a technical discussion board, and not a life-counseling center, I see no reason why it should even have an anon-function.
It doesn't seem that way to a lot of people, see Having our anonymous cake and eating it too for a glimmer of that though
Whether it is a bug, "per se" ignores whether or not it is desirable or helpful behavior.
Hmm, its an optional option that you turned on in your program -- I'm not sure how that is related to desireability and helpfulness
If you want it and its helpful for you, turn it on
If you do not want it and its not helpful for you, turn it off
But that gets back to the purpose of the software being to *help* the users of it -- not to gratify the ego of those who dominate it -- an opinion that I definitely seem to be in a minority of around here.
Your attitude stinks.
Well, sorry, but I think that isn't very reasonable either;