> That is out of order. I don't have a secret setup, it's not my setup.
> If other people aren't willing to show you exactly what they're doing, they have the liberty to do so.

Precisely. You are talking, but you have no idea what you are talking about. It's hearsay, you don't actually know.
You have citing problems that you have never actually seen. That's the problem!



-----Original Message-----
From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, September 2, 2024 2:33 PM
To: Tiago Freire <tmiguelf_at_hotmail.com>
Cc: std-proposals_at_lists.isocpp.org; Tom Honermann <tom_at_honermann.net>
Subject: Re: [std-proposals] Revising #pragma once

On Mon, 2 Sept 2024 at 15:24, Tiago Freire <tmiguelf_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have given you a detailed explanation of the minimum set of complexity that is required of a project to even hit such a problem.
> And have showed you how that minimum set must include doing things that are considered bad practice.
>
> All I got from you is just some handwave "I have this secret setup that doesn't work but I'm not going to actually show you".
> Either show us the problem or bugger off.

That is out of order. I don't have a secret setup, it's not my setup.
If other people aren't willing to show you exactly what they're doing, they have the liberty to do so.

What suffices to me is that those descriptions are splendidly convincing to me. If they aren't convincing to you, too bad.

And for what it's worth, I'm rather tempted to bugger, instead of off, to the moderation interface of this mailing list.