This seems overly harsh to me. Scott clearly presented an inconsistent behaviour:
sum((foo,bar)) – that is unarguably undesirable. This may not match the dictionary definition of “bug” or “broken”, but the basic sentiment is surely correct… If anyone is being offended by these words then meh, is this not being a little hypersensitive / combative even, and taking offence where none has been given (let alone intended)?
Also the original title has been changed for something that fails to convey the original meaning. At least “Inconsistent overflow behaviour…” surely?? The central point of his post was to draw attention to the inconsistency, and changing the title thus does no more than dull the effect. I would be rather miffed if someone reworded a post of mine. My words on my own!
I don’t see anything worthy of rebuke in what he has posted – it appears to be a useful community contribution. Hence I can only surmise from the wording of “A tip that you’ve heard before” that there is some kind of grudge from a previous time.
I feel it is important to give someone the benefit of the doubt; today is a fresh day, let the sounds of yesterday fade away – the nectar is in the moment!
As for “raising multiple independent issues”, I’ve just been told off for that too. My bad I’m sure (I should remain quiet on technical issues, I have little to contribute). But the dictionary definition of “discourse” is “open discussion”, and is that not exactly what we want here as a community? It sounds as if the same stringency of protocol that applies on the Github Issue Tracker is being applied here. I thought the whole point of Discourse was a more relaxed/open-ended forum for discussion. Otherwise what is the point in its existence? If this is just going to operate in the same manner as the Issue Tracker… Isn’t that just creating a headache by splitting issues into 2 places?
Doesn’t it make more sense that this place is used for (more) general pow-wow and the fruits of the discussion make it to the Github issue tracker, which can then be kept nice and clean?
It seems a sensible and natural ordering: Gitter (for the most general and most transient conversation), Issue Tracker (for focused permanent conversation) and Discourse in the middle.
I feel I’m walking a fine line in speaking my mind. I sure wish someone else had spoken up instead. I need the Julia community much more than it needs me, and writing this certainly doesn’t serve my own interests a jot.