On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
2009/10/20 Ryan Delaney
<ryan.delaney(a)gmail.com>om>:
I like this. Ideally IAR should never be
"invoked", as its not a rule;
IAR
should be assumed. That said, I agree with the
call and want to give
props
for the detailed explanation, which should help
smooth things over.
I disagree. Following rules should be the default. We should only
ignore them if we have a good reason to do so. Otherwise, there is no
point having rules at all.
This is a bizarre, but ancient, misunderstanding of IAR. All IAR means is
that priority number one is doing what is right, rather than pedantic
allegiance to a dictatorial interpretation of rules. Since IAR is not itself
a justification for anything, there is never any useful information added by
saying "I am invoking IAR." The only defense is "I did this because X"
where
X is the reason that what you did was a good idea, so you might as well skip
to the end. Rather than saying "I am invoking IAR and I did this because X",
just say "I did this because X."
- causa sui