src/rxvtfont.C ascent/descent and g.xOff patch

[John D Jones III]

On 01/26/14 15:18, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 02:38:46AM +0200, clutton <clutton at zoho.com> wrote:
>
> Honestly, seems urxvt has the more readable output here.
>
>
> Let's not discuss semantics here - when you repeat wrong statements even
> though you have been corrected before without giving new arguments (or any
> agruments,) you are factually ignoring them.
>
> Claiming "I do not ignore them" when you clearly do doesn't work.
>
>
> You answers or lack of them have nothing to do with it. It's what you
> claim, not what you don't claim, that shows you are ignorant.
>
>
> I can assure you, before adding a FAQ entry I would do my own research,
> rather than trusting you blindly.
>
>
> It's your job to properly explain yourself, not mine. My reply was
> conditional.
>
>
> The only one with a blacklist here is you.
>
>
> That's what I did, yes. Why do you think I should come to another
> conlusion after reading it?
>
>
> He ignored it and just repeated what he said before?
>

Makes me glad that I have finally been superseded as the rxvt-unicode 
mailing list ignoramus... man, I thought that was never going to 
happen... ;-)

-- 
Thanks,
John D Jones III
UNIX Zealot; Perl Lover