>> Anyway, you try to focus on the weak points of the arguments. I understand,
>> it's a natural defense mechanism.
> Here it is again.
> Psychologizing your opponent is dangerous, may be insulting and won't
> bring the quest forward.
Oops, seems I derailed again. Thanks for pointing these out, it helps me notice.
I have problems when someone looks to me like putting a lot of efforts into not seeing where we are talking from, and only pointing things from their perspective (all this while, I think, we try to understand theirs). But I do realise now that it's just myself who has an understanding problem: if I truly understood the other person I'd not be surprised. What would work wonders for me is to say something like "I understand your position and why you think it's better but for me it's useless because...".
It looks like most of our missunderstandings come from the fact that I expect others to be familiar with a lot of concepts or how a significant portion of the developers in the world work & function. Based on previous messages I discovered that's not the case at all, and it looks like this community is sometimes a bit "unaware" of how things work for a lot of people "outside". I'm sorry if that sounds offensive, I just don't know how to say it. I really don't mean this in a bad way, maybe it's because you know of these other ways but decided the Emacs way is superior and with time you forgot a bit? More specifically I was surprised to have to explain why namespaces have advantages, why tutorials & stackoverflow has a lot of success. From my perspective these are obvious and thus it's hard for me to realise when someone simply needs basic explanations about these.
Philippe