Just a reminder, one of the original #scalaz codes of conduct was; criticism of your code is not a criticism of your person.
-
-
Replying to @dibblego
I like this, but JSYK, for those of us late to the game (anyone not present at THE meeting) an unwritten CoC is equivalent to non-existent.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tomas_mikula
But it isn't. It's equivalent to "I don't know."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
From my perspective it's the same as non-existent: it has no effect on my conduct within the project.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tomas_mikula
That's because the Scalaz CoC works, even though you don't know.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
If it works, then it works trivially, as in being tautological.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tomas_mikula
I assure you, it is not working trivially. You've mistaken "working" necessitates "written down" and "widely understood." A common mistake.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
No, I haven't. If it's effectively the same as no CoC, but you claim it's working, I call it working trivially.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tomas_mikula
But it's not effectively the same, because what exists, and what would otherwise exist, are completely disparate. I assure you of this.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
I can only trust your word and judgment on this. I prefer arguments that I can verify myself.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Sure, you're welcome to transition from "I don't know" to "I do know." That's not the same as "must be written down."
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.