| > The edit? No. Why would it be a typo? You assume everyone's first language is English, right? No, I was asking if it was a typo because I interpreted it as being a counter-point to the point you were trying to make. Here it is again, emphasis mine: > Edit: also, searching for "prolog web framework" gets you stuff about using prolog for web application development. [...] And no sniff of this new framework. I interpreted this as being critical of fuzzy matching, but I realize now you may have been giving an example of a transliteration a hypothetical searcher would make themselves, which makes more sense. Since what you described is what I consider to be the ideal behavior of a search engine, I thought it was possibly you meant to say "also, searching for 'prologue web framework'". I'm sorry I misunderstood. > The language is an implementation detail [...] I don't personally agree with this. If the language is important to the project (in this case, it is since this is a web framework for Nim), I would probably make a point to add that context. > I think I looked at your history, and this is not the first time you got in to a debate like this, so I'm out... Sincerely asking (it sounds snarky but I don't know how else to ask): is there something wrong about the way I'm arguing my position? I am not trying to be rude or anything, I just sincerely disagree. Would it be better if I just conceded or simply stopped responding? > it's a bad name - the creator should probably rethink it or prefix "Nim" to make it unique, but whatever. Disagree. I suppose it's my fault for arguing what clearly comes down to your opinion. Edit: > My position is that you are massively underestimating the issue with the words basically looking and sounding the same. I totally understand the hypothetical issues that can come up in this kind of situation. My position is simply that in this case the arguments against using this name are contrived and furthermore are resolved with the slightest pinch of context. |