Re: Changes in font locking
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
David Kastrup writes:
> _After_ looking up the XEmacs history. You conveniently forget this
> little detail time and again.
[...]
> Which was becoming plausible just after checking the XEmacs history.
> Which you conveniently forgot.
I don't know when Ralf did the checking, but the posting order seems
to be the reverse, by about 8 hours.
Message-Id: <87ps7cmich.fsf(a)neutrino.caeruleus.net>
Message-Id: <87veh4n5cq.fsf(a)neutrino.caeruleus.net>
> I should hope we could do better than that, but I am afraid that you
> are able to convinve me otherwise time and again.
In the light of the above, it seems much of the convincing takes place
in the privacy of your own skull. The mistake about the timing is
surely an "honest" mistake, but to make such a defamatory statement
*twice* without checking (a curious omission, given the frequency with
which you demand message-ids from me) clearly demonstrates your
conviction of impregnable righteousness.
I already told you: please provide actual quotes before applying your
twisted memory and word sense. To call "I doubt it, but can't check
the CVS because Savannah is down" (and it is just getting up again) a
defamatory statement "without checking (a curious omission..." when I
clearly and explicitly wrote that I tried checking it and why it was
not possible at the moment, is really despicable.
You can't with a straight face claim that you forgot this: I actually
quoted the passage to you in the last article in the thread.
I take my leave of this thread.
A wise decision.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta