Register forum user name Search FAQ

Gammon Forum

Notice: Any messages purporting to come from this site telling you that your password has expired, or that you need to verify your details, confirm your email, resolve issues, making threats, or asking for money, are spam. We do not email users with any such messages. If you have lost your password you can obtain a new one by using the password reset link.
 Entire forum ➜ MUSHclient ➜ Python ➜ Easy Text editor?

Easy Text editor?

It is now over 60 days since the last post. This thread is closed.     Refresh page


Pages: 1  2  3 4  5  

Posted by David Haley   USA  (3,881 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #30 on Sun 25 Feb 2007 08:44 PM (UTC)
Message
Quote:
I don't know where you get the idea that events are objects...
Because Shaun is talking about objects in general and you seem to think that "object" is a very particular notion reserved to GUI programming with Windows event handlers.

David Haley aka Ksilyan
Head Programmer,
Legends of the Darkstone

http://david.the-haleys.org
Top

Posted by Shaun Biggs   USA  (644 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #31 on Mon 26 Feb 2007 12:19 AM (UTC)

Amended on Mon 26 Feb 2007 12:46 AM (UTC) by Shaun Biggs

Message
Wow... the fact that the object/event thing was unclear was unexpected. For a quick explanation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_oriented_programming and please note that the language that MUSHclient is written in is C++, an object oriented language.

As for the example given of light and heal, I have two questions. 1) Why aren't you just calling the functions themselves instead of some function that splits it up? 2) Why don't you just use Lua?

With Lua, you can make a table of functions to be called at whatever point is needed.

function printlight( blah )
  send( "cast light" )
end
function printheal( blah )
  if blah == "" then
    send( "cast heal" )
  else
    send( "cast heal "..blah )
  end
end

functiontable = { light = printlight,
                  heal = printheal}

function OnPluginCall( data )
  command = data:sub( 1, 10 )
  restofdata = data:sub( 11 )
  functiontable[command](restofdata)
end

All of that is assuming that the first 10 characters is your command portion, and the rest is for arguments, since from the first post, that's the only conclusion that I could draw. Otherwise if you're trying to heal a character by the name of Sunlight, things would get messy.

I'm also completely lost on why you would test for a nil value being passed to the heal function. Any reasonable mud will strip that last space out as routine, and you're just wasting a comparison on it.

It is much easier to fight for one's ideals than to live up to them.
Top

Posted by Nick Gammon   Australia  (23,100 posts)  Bio   Forum Administrator
Date Reply #32 on Mon 26 Feb 2007 05:29 AM (UTC)
Message
Shadowfyr, what you want to do can probably be done --- somehow.

However what we are wrestling with here is quite a few unknowns, where behaviour is buried in the bowels of places that are hard to examine, if you will parden the metaphor.

You want to install some sort of control using the ActiveX mechanism, whose internal workings I am not sure about, and have operating system events (like a mouse click) be passed by Windows, via MFC (which also is large and complex) and eventually reach your script, which itself is running under Lua. However the moment that the button is clicked Lua won't be running (probably).

The scenario would have to be something like this:


  • The mouse click generates an operating system event.

  • The MFC main loop detects that and doesn't immediately discard it (which may well happen as the window in question is not in its internal list).

  • It generates an event in my client code - and I somehow identify which plugin/script it belongs to.

  • I start the Lua interpreter up, and call your routine that you have previously registered --- again, somehow.

  • Then if your script decides to not handle the event, but let the operating system take the "default behaviour" somehow this has to be unwound, so we get the OS to do its default thing.


If I were a major MFC expert (rather than a user of it), and an ActiveX expert, maybe I could make all this work.

However to be honest, if I was going to spend that much time -- and this sort of thing tends to be open ended, in other words it might be 100+ hours -- then I might consider whether the bulk of the MUSHclient users would prefer the time to be spent, say, neatening up the configuration windows.

- Nick Gammon

www.gammon.com.au, www.mushclient.com
Top

Posted by Shadowfyr   USA  (1,788 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #33 on Mon 26 Feb 2007 07:30 PM (UTC)
Message
Yep. Events are just messages. While they might, in some strange cases, *contain* a reference to an object (I.e. memory address), they do not themselves constitute an "object". Broadening the term to mean something like, "Discreat chuncks of code or data.", which would be what was implied by calling events such, pretty much makes the term meaningless, since it would describe "everything" from an boolean value to an application.

As to the function table thing.. Sure, if I knew Lua that well I would do it that way. I have barely done anything with it though, so complaining that I am doing it the hard way... And no, my examples just *happened* to be 10 characters, One could presume that they wouldn't always be that. After all, its the *user* that is going to be defining what they call each button, and they could just as easilly call "heal", "My bitching HP restorer!". The only certainty is that the code for the event would take the name of the control and tack it on to the start of the data being sent. The presumption being that other stuff might be included, such as the "name" of the person it targets, so that could be sent as well. Though that might be stored client side in the plugin instead, rather than as part of the control. I mean, the point isn't to create a single instance of something like a toolbar, but a generic system with which a toolbar is *one* option. The example though presume that someone has predesigned a toolbar and that the icons on it can hold the "target", not just their own name. The code would therefor have to look for the location of the ":" that seperates the name from the data, not just the first 10 characters. Sorry I didn't make the example generic enough to be clear about that.

Oh, and more to the point, while Lua contains such lookups, its not a guarrentee that such a "generic" solution for using new and pre-existing components "will" be used in only the Lua language. This means that "my" version would be right for "most" of the languages avialable, just sloppy for Lua.

---

Now, as to your comments Nick. This is why I am doing the leg work. I know that no one here has a clear understanding of how it all fits together, so I am trying to figure it out, so that some solution that will work becomes possible. That may be the easy way (figuring out how it can work with MFC) or the hard way (designing some generic solution using an EXE that can funnel the stuff through the back door). I would prefer the easy way, since the hard way still involves solving a number of issues, which may actually be the *same* issues that would need to be solved to do it in the client. I just don't know at the moment, but I am beginning to strongly suspect that this is the case, say an 80% chance. And to make matters worse, I am not even sure if events from ActiveX *work* the same way as non-Ole events. There is some implication that they bypass the event management completely and directly call the entry point for the function they are given, which would create a completely different can of worms. And, as you point out, its a major unknown what happens then. Its either 1) the enegine remains asleep and everything goes down in flames, 2) they thought of that and the engine will wake up to handle the event, then go to sleep again, or 3) it will do 2, except that it won't sleep again and the client will lock up.

We just don't know, and finding people that *know* the languages involved, instead of merely *using* them is like trying to find an expert on Gene Replication at a Creationist convention...
Top

Posted by David Haley   USA  (3,881 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #34 on Mon 26 Feb 2007 07:51 PM (UTC)
Message
Quote:
We just don't know, and finding people that *know* the languages involved, instead of merely *using* them is like trying to find an expert on Gene Replication at a Creationist convention...
What an odd analogy... :-)

What languages are you talking about? How can one use a programming language without knowing it? Or were you referring to using a library versus understanding its internals and implementation?

David Haley aka Ksilyan
Head Programmer,
Legends of the Darkstone

http://david.the-haleys.org
Top

Posted by Shaun Biggs   USA  (644 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #35 on Mon 26 Feb 2007 09:16 PM (UTC)

Amended on Mon 26 Feb 2007 10:49 PM (UTC) by Shaun Biggs

Message
Quote:
Yep. Events are just messages. While they might, in some strange cases, *contain* a reference to an object (I.e. memory address), they do not themselves constitute an "object". Broadening the term to mean something like, "Discreat chuncks of code or data.", which would be what was implied by calling events such, pretty much makes the term meaningless, since it would describe "everything" from an boolean value to an application.

I'm so glad that you wrote the last line of that part, since that is exactly the definition of an object. The number 3 is an object in true OOP languages, as is the + operator, as is the whole program. A class is a set of data, the means to access that data, and a way to transform that data. An object is an instance of that class. I'm sorry if the actual definition of the term does not match whatever is in your head. You were speaking of message passing, which is a way to get another object to start up a function. If you bothered to look at the link I posted, you would see that I was showing you the information I had, and a way to back it up from an outside source.

Quote:
And no, my examples just *happened* to be 10 characters

Well, I was attempting to match your example. I seem to have done so well enough that you've started arguing against the logic of what was done there. Congratulations, you're now arguing with yourself after this point.

Quote:
As to the function table thing.. Sure, if I knew Lua that well I would do it that way. I have barely done anything with it though, so complaining that I am doing it the hard way.

And yet your solution was to implement wxLua into MUSHclient, talking about how easy and wonderful it would be. Interesting point of view considering you don't know the language you are talking about, by your own admission.

Quote:
Now, as to your comments Nick. This is why I am doing the leg work. I know that no one here has a clear understanding of how it all fits together, so I am trying to figure it out, so that some solution that will work becomes possible.

Nice to know you think Nick has no clear understanding of how MUSHclient works. I'll forward any and all questions over to you from now on. I'd suggest taking the time, as Nick has, and learning each of the scripting languages that are used in MUSHclient. While you're at it, learn C++, and software design. After you are finished with that, you might be in a better position to make various claims about what people know and don't know.

I really hope that you realize that all you are doing is proving more and more with each post that you have no idea what is involved in programming large applications. You have shown no understanding of basic programming terms in several threads, you have completely missed the fact that even a one or two line change in code can result in several kilobytes worth (or more) in the executable, and you constantly suggest things as quick, simple fixes, when they would take hundreds of hours to do.

It is much easier to fight for one's ideals than to live up to them.
Top

Posted by Nick Gammon   Australia  (23,100 posts)  Bio   Forum Administrator
Date Reply #36 on Tue 27 Feb 2007 06:43 AM (UTC)
Message
Quote:

Essentially, Its my version of a MUSHclient port for Linux. Xpertmud, Kmuddy, a few other Linux clients out there are pretty decent, however in terms of speed, scripting uses and user friendliness they are entirely lacking.

So in creating this client (as in the very very early stages of it), I am writing my own client in Python, to function much as MUSHclient does, but for Linux.


Excellent! I hope you enjoy doing this. It is certainly a challenging job writing a client, and with luck you will learn from the mistakes that previous client writers (such as me) have made, and make yours easy to use, and reliable.

If I was starting from scratch I would certainly do things differently, but I don't really have the energy to start from scratch now. :)

I notice that Zugg, the writer of ZMud, has decided to write a new client (CMud) rather than keep evolving ZMud, which shows that he too finds it hard to keep improving what has probably become a somewhat unwieldy piece of code (no criticism intended here).

Clients like MUSHclient tend to evolve over time, and become a bit unwieldy because you decide on better ways of doing things, but want to have backwards compatibility for people who are used to the old way. Hence there is a fair bit of duplication in MUSHclient (eg. macros / accelerators).

If you can nail down a design from the start, and stick with it, you will probably have a nice, clean client.

Personally I would use Lua from scratch if I made a new client, including doing things like reading in all the configuration stuff (eg. triggers, aliases, world address etc.). Lua is ideal for this, and indeed was initially designed with this purpose in mind.

Just as an aside, some people are finding that MUSHclient, run under Wine, provides quite a decent Linux client.

- Nick Gammon

www.gammon.com.au, www.mushclient.com
Top

Posted by David Haley   USA  (3,881 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #37 on Tue 27 Feb 2007 07:25 AM (UTC)
Message
Speaking of MUSHclient under Wine... :-)

You would make one very happy camper if you had an option to not attempt to maximize the window at startup. Every time I start it, it remembers the position, but tries to resize the window to the full width, which means that I have to resize it back down to one screen's worth.

It'd really make my day. :-)

David Haley aka Ksilyan
Head Programmer,
Legends of the Darkstone

http://david.the-haleys.org
Top

Posted by Shadowfyr   USA  (1,788 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #38 on Tue 27 Feb 2007 06:27 PM (UTC)
Message
Bloody hell.. Are you people intentionally misreading everything I say?

Yes David, I mean the internal implimentation of the code. How the event sink system, Ole and other components work on a deap level, which would allow you to circumvent some of the silly limitations of stuff like MFC that basically say, "Ah now. Don'tcha worry about the details. I'll handle that." And by the same token, I am quite sure Nick knows how Mushclient itself works, he admits to *not* knowing enough beyond MFC to know how or even *if* some solution would be complicated or easy. And neither, from what I can tell, do any of you. I have been digging through what little of the bowels of this stuff as I could easilly track down and still am confused about stuff. As far as I can tell, most of you haven't read anything at all about it. Frankly, every once in a while something like this will come up where people just, "Take the easy way out.", and code what they can, instead of what is possible. Why? Because the documentation on how to do it right is scattered, confusing and archaic, with very few concrete examples, while there are 10,000 examples of simply ignoring the problem and living with the consequences of not understanding what is really going on under the hood. Once people had to know this. MS, in each new version of their compilers, have shoved the archetecture of the whole thing farther and farther beneath the surface, making it less and less likely that the next book on the shelf is going to be titled, "How to solve problems with X, by not doing things MS' way." Heck, the .NET system won't even let you create ActiveX controls any more, because they figured .NET was so much better, never mind that that buries stuff that ActiveX could do under yet another layer of crap.

The irony here is, had I asked some of these questions 10 years ago, I might have gotten answers, only 10 years ago their wouldn't have been a lot of script engines to have a problem with. Its damn frustrating.

And, the joke about Gene Replication at a Creationist convention is that they are more than happy to completely misunderstand the science on the basis of what they **think** is true, while failing to understand anything about the science that produced the book. And, just to be clear, I am describing how a lot of forums on the various subjects work, not here. People here tend to be more innovative, possibly because there are obvious limitations in the system. Pretty much universally, everyplace else, if you want to ask a question about how something works outside the context and assumptions of those who follow the standard chart on how to impliment it, you're SOL. No one knows, because everyone else started with, "Oh wow!", then jumped straight into doing it *exactly* the same way all of the sample files show it being used. In the case of a lot of script engines, that means one of three things, a) if you are using GUI, code the entire application in the script language, b) if you can't do that, run it in IE or some pre-existing environment that has already "solved" the insurmountable problems that none of the examples show "any" solution to or c) don't use *any* GUI elements from in the script.

Not exactly conducive to novel innovations, never mind a better understanding of the OS or libraries involved. Its like trying to make a show like American Chopper and having everyone tell you, "You can't do that, because it would be just way to complicated to make new parts so the bikes look different. Or wait... you mean you're just going to paint them right?" The only solution, in the case of code, is to ignore the detractors, then spend $200 on books, some of which haven't been published in 5 years, like the ATL book, just so you can try to get some sense of how the fracking heck it all works. I should have bought the Ole book instead. The ATL one was helpful, but missing huge chunks of the basics. :( Maybe next month, when I have money to throw at it again. Hopefully it also would explain how ActiveX and normal system events differ, if they truly do.
Top

Posted by Orik   USA  (182 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #39 on Tue 27 Feb 2007 06:39 PM (UTC)
Message
I'm sure Nick would be happy to put a link up of your finished program once you write it out. Until then, please don't bag on him or David...they DO know what they are doing and talking about. Just because you can't get something to work that only YOU think is necessary doesn't mean Nick should change the whole way that his program works.

Again, I'm sure Nick would be happy to put a link up of YOUR finished program once YOU're done writing it.

Top

Posted by David Haley   USA  (3,881 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #40 on Tue 27 Feb 2007 10:17 PM (UTC)
Message
Quote:
Bloody hell.. Are you people intentionally misreading everything I say?


Well, Shadowfyr... you have a tendency of using terms in non-standard ways. This is confusing to people. For instance the whole thread about dynamic linking was due to an initial misunderstanding based on the fact that what you think static vs. dynamic "should" mean is not what the accepted definition is. Here you first spoke of languages, but what you really meant was libraries.

Maybe you write "quicker than you think", as the saying goes, or maybe your thoughts aren't perfectly clear to begin with because you are still learning all of this, but whatever the reason, I (and I believe other people as well judging from other posts) find your posts rather confusing to read.

My personal belief is that it is hard to have precision in thought without having precision in language. If you (general you) can't articulate something clearly (and better yet, concisely) then chances are that you haven't fully understood it.



As for your other points:
I've said it several times in the past and I'll say it again. I really, really think it would help if you actually wrote some code of your own, even for something very simple. You are trying to understand very, very complicated concepts without even knowing how to write a simple program using the tools in question. It's not surprising that you are having trouble and end up feeling frustrated. I think it would also give you respect for the subtlety and complexity that these problems sometimes have.

You have a tendency to speak with scorn and contempt of people who prefer so-called "easy" solutions, but I think you would develop some degree of sympathy if you actually wore their shoes for a moment.

So please, try to learn the basics of this before jumping so far ahead into the bowels of the internals of the guts of the operating system. Slow down and you will benefit.

There is a saying in Latin: "Festina Lente" -- hurry yourself slowly.
The point is that if you work diligently and quickly but starting from the beginning, you will make much more progress than if you try to rush about without deeply understanding what you are doing.

David Haley aka Ksilyan
Head Programmer,
Legends of the Darkstone

http://david.the-haleys.org
Top

Posted by Shadowfyr   USA  (1,788 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #41 on Wed 28 Feb 2007 07:43 PM (UTC)
Message
Thanks for the advice. I know quite a few languages though, so not knowing the specifics of any given language doesn't mean I don't have a decent picture in my mind of what it *should* do to impliment the idea, even if the specifics are a little more vague. I am one of those people that, when completely familiar with the syntax, can code a thousand line program in a few hours, then spend less than half that debugging it. I rarely have to "plan out" the design of anything. I admit that this may be biasing my thinking a bit, since what *seems* obvious to me in the big picture can look really complicated to someone else.

Languages that I don't know well, get me a tad more frustrated, especially when they are ones like C++, where if you are not using something like MFC, require you spend a lot more time telling the system how to do things, than telling it what you want it to do. It doesn't help at all that right now I have the choice between something like GCC, which has, at best, a command line debugger (yuck!) and no sort of GUI based code editor with helpers in it to get around having to code it all the hard way, or... basically nothing. The only C++ I have is so old I am not sure it even supports MFC4.0, never mind anything newer, so testing some solutions are out. GCC doesn't even include MFC. Buying a copy... it so far outside my budget that I might as well try selling a kidney to pay for it. Its not like I am in a position to *write* any of the code needed to test my ideas. At worst, you can justifiably accuse me of jumping the gun and pointing out possible solutions, *before* I have a clear enough picture to show anyone else how the pieces are supposed to fit together. I am sorry about that. Next time I will try to make sure that the puzzle box is directly visible and the pieces are "picture side up". lol

Oh, and you're probably right about writing quicker than I think. I used to stutter and I do tend to still do so in text occationally. Its cause in my case is simply that my brain is reprocessing what I am writing even before I have finished writing it. So, its actually a misnomer. The problem isn't that I don't think fast enough, its that I think too fast and can literally change perspective in mid sentence, at times I am trying to get something complicated out. Been more than a few times I have gone back to read something, only to realize that I have literally produced two halves of two completely different sentences as one written sentence... Kind of problematic when trying to parse the result. lol

However, you are still admonishing me about the subtlety and complexity of something that *if* you understood it either you would have the answers I need. This is like arguing the subtlety and complexity of crystal formation, when maybe the art of producing them is little more than adding food coloring to some high saturated sugar water and dropping a sugar cube on a string into it. That it "looks" subtle and complex may be a given. But neither of us is in a position to say that it really is, unless we understand the mechanics of how to produce it. Once you do, at least in the case of colored sugar crystal candies, its certainly subtle, but hardly complex. At best, you can admonish me for not knowing if it is or not, not that it "is" and I don't appreciate that fact. I have already found that my assumptions about the complexity of "some" aspects of the way this all works have been blown out of proportion by my own lack of understanding. Can we at least agree that your's may be as well and that just maybe this isn't as complex as you insist? Seriously, ignorance is not an insult, its just a statement of fact. Admitting to it means you can progress in understanding, rather than just making snide remarks about how the other guy that is progressing, how ever slowly, is on a wild goose chase.

Believe me, if I had the means to code a simple MFC app and then try to figure out what was going on, I wouldn't be dropping suggestions about possible avenues to a solution here instead, in the obviously vain hope someone else cares enough to take an interest. And by interest I mean more than some other threads commentor who stated, "If you can ever get this to work, it will be great." I am trying to build an glider using sticks and tree bark here and your complaining that I am not Galileo, who also had better materials to work with anyway. Well, I am Antonio Salieri in this case, sadly, there seems to be a lack of Mozarts around. lol
Top

Posted by Nick Gammon   Australia  (23,100 posts)  Bio   Forum Administrator
Date Reply #42 on Wed 28 Feb 2007 09:00 PM (UTC)
Message
Quote:

... right now I have the choice between something like GCC, which has, at best, a command line debugger (yuck!) and no sort of GUI based code editor with helpers in it to get around having to code it all the hard way ...


It isn't that bad. Assuming you are using Windows, and have installed Cygwin, you can edit with any Windows text editor. I am very happy with Crimson Editor, which is free, fast, and has syntax colouring.

You can edit with Crimson Editor, and even configure it to make a hotkey do the compile step. So, once you are ready to test you hit F5 (or whatever), and it does:


gcc test.c -o test


You can capture the output of the compile in Crimson Editor "output" window, to read your error messages, and apply changes.

- Nick Gammon

www.gammon.com.au, www.mushclient.com
Top

Posted by Nick Gammon   Australia  (23,100 posts)  Bio   Forum Administrator
Date Reply #43 on Wed 28 Feb 2007 09:10 PM (UTC)
Message
Microsoft have also released "Visual Studio Lite" or whatever it is called exactly, which is a free download of Visual Studio, including C++, VB, and so on.

It was available last year, not sure if it still is. I suspect it is designed to tackle the "I want free software" market, which the GNU tools are catering to quite well.

If you like the integrated environment, it could be worth trying that.

You obviously know assembler, Shadowfyr, it could be worth trying a few C examples, and testing out some of your ideas.

- Nick Gammon

www.gammon.com.au, www.mushclient.com
Top

Posted by Shaun Biggs   USA  (644 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #44 on Wed 28 Feb 2007 09:20 PM (UTC)

Amended on Wed 28 Feb 2007 09:26 PM (UTC) by Shaun Biggs

Message
Quote:
I am one of those people that, when completely familiar with the syntax, can code a thousand line program in a few hours, then spend less than half that debugging it. I rarely have to "plan out" the design of anything.

Well, there's the problem then. If you don't plan out things, you will never be able to deal with large projects. I do the same with most small scripts and programs, but for anything reasonably large, you NEED to start planning ahead. If you insist that you can just "see the design in my head" then you will get lost, as you have here.
Quote:
I admit that this may be biasing my thinking a bit, since what *seems* obvious to me in the big picture can look really complicated to someone else.

Interesting thing to say right after saying that you don't bother planning things out. Ignoring the possiblity that people aren't seing the "big picture" when saying that they are the ones who sit and plan things out just dosen't make any sense.
Quote:
The problem isn't that I don't think fast enough, its that I think too fast and can literally change perspective in mid sentence, at times I am trying to get something complicated out. Been more than a few times I have gone back to read something, only to realize that I have literally produced two halves of two completely different sentences as one written sentence... Kind of problematic when trying to parse the result. lol

And of course, you can't possibly write out your notes in notepad, and then just copy them over after you've gone over them a few times. Or you could do what I do, and post a small note, then go back with the lovely edit option that the forums provides for you.
Quote:
The problem isn't that I don't think fast enough, its that I think too fast and can literally change perspective in mid sentence, at times I am trying to get something complicated out.

Ah yes, this does wonders for proving that you can just bang out a program in a matter of hours and only need a small debugging phase. I have a similar problem. It results in me needing to plan out quite a bit more than I believe I need to, and then double check everything I've written to make sure I haven't made any little mistakes. Then, after all that, I can start debugging, which should take forever with any decent program. There are still bug fixes going on with MUSHclient, and it's been the most stable thing on my computer since I've started using it. I think I've had notepad crash (stupid poor overflow handling) more than MC.
Quote:
However, you are still admonishing me about the subtlety and complexity of something that *if* you understood it either you would have the answers I need.

No one has mentioned this at all. In fact, what people have been saying is that if you understood certain things better, then YOU would have the answers you needed. Which is why a few of us have suggested that you write a sample of what you are trying to do. It would make things clearer, and you would learn more about the topic than you would by saying "So this guy over here said that this is possible." Not only that, but you would have something to point to showing that what you are saying can be done is possible, which is hard to argue with.
Quote:
This is like arguing the subtlety and complexity of crystal formation, when maybe the art of producing them is little more than adding food coloring to some high saturated sugar water and dropping a sugar cube on a string into it. That it "looks" subtle and complex may be a given. But neither of us is in a position to say that it really is, unless we understand the mechanics of how to produce it. Once you do, at least in the case of colored sugar crystal candies, its certainly subtle, but hardly complex.

Very good analogy, but I would take it a step further. The crystals are simple, true. But try and get them to grow in a very specific pattern, like an actual cube. Basic elements thrown together can have unpredicted complications when pulled to a larger goal.
Quote:
Seriously, ignorance is not an insult, its just a statement of fact. Admitting to it means you can progress in understanding, rather than just making snide remarks about how the other guy that is progressing, how ever slowly, is on a wild goose chase.

Very good... now please admit it and move on. I honestly haven't seen anyone here deny ignorance as much as you have. Even when faced with proof, such as the whole events are objects thing, you have completely skipped over the proof, going on later to try and assert your incorrect definition in later posts.
Quote:
Well, I am Antonio Salieri in this case, sadly, there seems to be a lack of Mozarts around. lol

<sarcasm>Umm... you want to teach our children and have theories surronding your involvement in our deaths?</sarcasm> Here's an suggestion. Stop making analogies. They can be easily and unintentionally misinterpreted to the end of days. Just say what you mean and be done with it instead of attempting to add more fuel to the fire.

It is much easier to fight for one's ideals than to live up to them.
Top

The dates and times for posts above are shown in Universal Co-ordinated Time (UTC).

To show them in your local time you can join the forum, and then set the 'time correction' field in your profile to the number of hours difference between your location and UTC time.


157,256 views.

This is page 3, subject is 5 pages long:  [Previous page]  1  2  3 4  5  [Next page]

It is now over 60 days since the last post. This thread is closed.     Refresh page

Go to topic:           Search the forum


[Go to top] top

Information and images on this site are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia License unless stated otherwise.