George,
Thanks for your note of common sense.

I have discovered that one or two people on UT can be a little touchy at times (hence my approach to you in a different thread, stating that I respect your views, but beg to differ), unfortunately I seem to have found another. I listen to all of your views & come here to learn, because this is your primary line of work & it is an important resource to me.

I have worked a long time in the s/w industry from a different aspect & I believe that I may bring different (but equally valid) views to the forum, & where I believe I can be of help I do so. The forum is on the whole a friendly place & I didn't think such a small joke could cause such an argument. Unfortunately, it is this sort of attitude that can put people off the forum, or at least very wary of making a contribution.

I believe Ed's response to my reply to you was over the top, & I to have no interest in getting deeper into the slanging match that Ed seems to want to make it. I just wanted to thank you for your attempt to steer it away from that.

Much respect
Paul

>>George,
>>As I replied to Nadya, I really didn't mean this to get out of hand. I just re-read Ed's reply to me & got more angry than I should have done over his comment about doing myself a favour & looking at his code.
>>
>>I'm not trying to set myself up as an expert on how things should be done & to that extent, I would prefer not to go into detail, that would only cause more arguments/discussions, my involvement in this thread only started with a flippant comment. (But there were one or two issues I felt with use of an array as a data structure, which needed better commenting & use of defines to aid readability & maintainability of the code, but that's just how I would do it, I work as part of a team & other people spend a lot of time looking at my code. I don't know if it's different for Ed.)
>>
>>There are many ways of doing things & I am not saying I am right or that Ed was wrong, just that he was wrong to tell me to do myself a favor by looking at his code.
>>
>Paul,
>
>I kind of got that feeling.
>
>At any rate, the point of my post was to get this moving in a positive direction. The exchange of POVs is always positive provided that the objective reasoning behind it is explained in an objective fashion. To one say something is either good or bad, helps no one. To say why, benefits all.