>>21335
>>21337
fugging bernds

1. commentary is not code
2. code cannot be sarcastic (if you try you get bad code instead)
3. I quoted code and comment and called it an exaggeration, and both of them were so, the code because it served no real purpose but only an imaginary one, the commentary because it was fucking obviously tongue-in-cheek and exaggeration was its humourous device

(when you further note that the commentary exaggeration referred to the code exaggeration you understand that the coder realised the exaggeration of his code, maybe he should have corrected it then instead of joking about it, but a joke if fine too)

god why the fuck am I even replying to this