By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
457,916 Members | 1,305 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 457,916 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines

P: n/a
The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines

20050222

Computing Folks of the industry:

please spread the debunking of the truncating line business of the
fucking unix-loving fuckheads, as outlines here:
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/w...cate_line.html

if this myth-debunking is known widely enough, there wouldn't be any
more line truncating business.

emacs community has always been a thinking community as opposed to the
unix criminals. However by historical happenstance, the emacs of GNU's
Not Unix is essentially a program for unixes, so unavoidable it has to
deal with and inherit some of the ill shits of unix, if for nothing
but to be practical.

However, as of today, emacs don't really have reason to have
arrow-down behavior to be dependent on the hard-coded line wraps. I
want the next emacs version's down-arrow behavior to be fixed. (and
optionally as another mode to move by EOL.)

The reason for this change is easy. For those habituated with hard
wrapped lines, this would cause no difference. However, for those who
have lines that return at logical places, this would be an
improvement. (This is the intuitive way, and all non-geek editors
behave this way, even most editors or IDEs designed for programing.)

The need in this change is significant. By the current behavior of
down-arrow by EOL char, it discourages logical line breaking,
encourages hard-coded line breaking, and engenders the huge and
wide-spread problems as a consequence (as partially detailed in the
url given above): Programs posted online are broken, the who-said-what
quoting systems are a mess to process and comprehend, and needless
complex programs that processes and re-process the hard-wrapped
lines... And also it seeds the bad notions by creation of a generation
of imperative languages based on hard-line wraps (e.g. many
languages's line comment; and cannot be nested), and the misleading
and harmful habituation in IT of sizing software by
EOL-counting. (both of these are hindrances to functional programing.)

Further, in programing there's large chapters and energy spent on
what's called "coding style", which refers to the petty issue of when
and how to press a return so the lines all jag in some uniform
way. This ubiquitous "coding style" activity is helped by the
hard-wrap habit of thinking, which created these EOL-centric language
syntaxes in the first place.

(
When coding in a programing language, the programer should never have
to enter returns for the sake of display-formatting. The language's
syntax and the editor should be able to display the code well on the
fly by a simple parsing. Some 90% of EOL in codes today are there
manually entered by programer that does not serve any function other
than hard-coded pretty-printing.
(as oppose to the sometimes a intentional return to make a point in
the code, either as logical break, or emphasizing a section.)

And as a consequence of these EOL-centric languages is that attention
are put on code by the lines, instead of functional or logical
units. For example, comments tends to be based on lines of code, as
opposed to on a functional unit or algorithm. Boolean clauses inside
IF clause each span a line, as opposed to being together as a
predicate unit.
(which smother new developments of such predicate unit in language
syntax or semantics)
IF blocks almost always span multiple lines, as opposed to the idea of
coherent unit of “if PREDICATE do BLOCK”.
(and such EOL-centric code tends to engender practices such as
calling and setting global variables here and there inside code
blocks).
Temporary variables occupy a line by themselves, as oppose to tucked
inconspicuously inside its functional unit...etc and so on.
(a example of a language that is not EOL-centric is Mathematica,
which displays the code with sensible justification, all done
automatically behind the scenes, just as a word processor is to
writing.
(and the language happens also to display typeset mathematics on the
fly.)
Similar mileu are in LISP languages, but they did not push this idea
further.
(That is to say, in LISP communities, they on occasion still do and
talk about the petty issues of manual return-pressing, even their
languages are potentially immune to the hard-wrap problems.
)
)
)

I hope the above is some elucidation on the hard-wrap and
line-truncation business. Please spread the info.

---------
This email is archived at
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/hard-wrap.html

Xah
xa*@xahlee.org
http://xahlee.org/

Nov 14 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
33 Replies


P: n/a
Xah Lee wrote:
The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines

20050222

Computing Folks of the industry:

please spread the debunking of the truncating line business of the
fucking unix-loving fuckheads, as outlines here:
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/w...cate_line.html


What I find *really* funny is that document is formatted.... using
at most 80 columns :-)

Nov 14 '05 #2

P: n/a
"Xah Lee" <xa*@xahlee.org> writes:
The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines

20050222

Computing Folks of the industry:

please spread the debunking of the truncating line business of the
fucking unix-loving fuckheads, as outlines here:

[snip]

Thank you for putting the abusive language near the top of your post,
so we know right away to ignore anything else you might have to say.

Note followups.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Nov 14 '05 #3

P: n/a
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:
"Xah Lee" <xa*@xahlee.org> writes:
The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines

20050222

Computing Folks of the industry:

please spread the debunking of the truncating line business of the
fucking unix-loving fuckheads, as outlines here:

[snip]

Thank you for putting the abusive language near the top of your post,
so we know right away to ignore anything else you might have to say.

Note followups.


You don't even have to read the top of the message;
'From: "Xah Leeh"' is enough to flag the message as ignorable.

--
Raymond Wiker Mail: Ra***********@fast.no
Senior Software Engineer Web: http://www.fast.no/
Fast Search & Transfer ASA Phone: +47 23 01 11 60
P.O. Box 1677 Vika Fax: +47 35 54 87 99
NO-0120 Oslo, NORWAY Mob: +47 48 01 11 60
Nov 14 '05 #4

P: n/a
Raymond Wiker <Ra***********@fast.no> wrote:
You don't even have to read the top of the message;
'From: "Xah Leeh"' is enough to flag the message as ignorable.


you can optimize by putting this in your spam filter.
----
Garry Hodgson, Technical Consultant, AT&T Labs

Your love, your anger, your kindness, your hate.
All of it creates the future for you and your children.
What kind of future are you creating today?
Nov 14 '05 #5

P: n/a
jacob navia wrote:
Xah Lee wrote:
The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
What I find *really* funny is that document is formatted.... using
at most 80 columns :-)


I find Xah Lee offensive and just plain stupid. What is this doing in
comp.lang groups?

Blargh.
Nov 14 '05 #6

P: n/a
Forrest Black wrote:
I find Xah Lee offensive and just plain stupid. What is this doing in
comp.lang groups?


Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage
newsgroups?
Nov 14 '05 #7

P: n/a
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.net> writes:
Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage
newsgroups?

Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).

--
Chris.
Nov 14 '05 #8

P: n/a
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:38:24 +0000 (UTC), in comp.lang.c , Chris
McDonald <ch***@csse.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.net> writes:
Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage
newsgroups?

Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).


by convention, groups not prefixed with a national identifier such as
de, fr, etc are considered to be english language groups unless their
charter states otherwise. As with any unmoderated group, there's
nothing to enforce this except common sense.

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Nov 14 '05 #9

P: n/a
In article <t6********************************@4ax.com>,
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote:
by convention, groups not prefixed with a national identifier such as
de, fr, etc are considered to be english language groups unless their
charter states otherwise. As with any unmoderated group, there's
nothing to enforce this except common sense.


I use a completely different convention. My convention is this:

If someone posts in a language other than English in a
newsgroup that is not specifically chartered for English, then
that person is restricting the number of people who are likely
to have the time and knowledge to answer them. One might advise
them of this, but one should otherwise leave them alone [unless
one can answer.]

The situation is no different than if you are in a bus/ train/
airplane and nearby people start talking in another language.
If they aren't obviously trying to include you, then
they aren't talking to you. Which is fine, considering that
most threads pretty quickly turn into one person talking to
another person without a care as to whether anyone else is
paying attention.
--
Oh, to be a Blobel!
Nov 14 '05 #10

P: n/a
Chris McDonald wrote:
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.net> writes:

Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage
newsgroups?


Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).


I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified
otherwise, just because they developed first and because their
users speak English. German newsgroups, for instance, are part of
the de.* hierarchy. I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too.

It's no restriction, just a convention. It's like not going into
an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the
waiter/waitress for ordering food.

--
No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's
consent. -- Abraham Lincoln
Nov 14 '05 #11

P: n/a
Ulrich Hobelmann <u.*********@web.de> writes:
I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified
otherwise, just because they developed first and because their
users speak English. German newsgroups, for instance, are part of
the de.* hierarchy. I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too. It's no restriction, just a convention. It's like not going into
an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the
waiter/waitress for ordering food.


We all certainly appreciate that there are conventions, but I am
uncomfortable with suggestions that languages other than English don't
belong in newgroups that have traditionally used English (outbursts are
increasingly seen). One can argue that USENET is dying a slow death,
and maybe hundreds on millions of Chinese won't even start using it.
But given how closely guarded topics of discussion must be in this
newsgroup to receive helpful responses, let's hope that someone will
provide definitive answers in cn.comp.lang.c. too.

--
Chris.
Nov 14 '05 #12

P: n/a
Chris McDonald wrote:
Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).


..i jimte mu'i lenu lo skamysnu pe lo bangu poi ke'a cu frica lei glico
ku'o cu zasti

Nov 14 '05 #13

P: n/a
On 27 Apr 2005 23:31:35 GMT, ro******@ibd.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca (Walter
Roberson) wrote:
In article <t6********************************@4ax.com>,
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote:
by convention, groups not prefixed with a national identifier such as
de, fr, etc are considered to be english language groups unless their
charter states otherwise. As with any unmoderated group, there's
nothing to enforce this except common sense.
I use a completely different convention. My convention is this:

If someone posts in a language other than English in a
newsgroup that is not specifically chartered for English, then
that person is restricting the number of people who are likely
to have the time and knowledge to answer them.


Also, they, and whoever chooses to answer, are withholding knowledge
from group participants who cannot read the articles. This should be
discouraged for the same reason that asking for a reply by private
email is discouraged.
One might advise
them of this, but one should otherwise leave them alone [unless
one can answer.]

The situation is no different than if you are in a bus/ train/
airplane and nearby people start talking in another language.
It is different. Suppose you are at a round-table technical
discussion, and a couple of the participants start using a language
that no-one else understands, presumably on the topic of the
roundtable. It would be considered rude, at the very least. That's a
closer analogy, IMO.
If they aren't obviously trying to include you, then
they aren't talking to you. Which is fine, considering that
most threads pretty quickly turn into one person talking to
another person without a care as to whether anyone else is
paying attention.


Not true, at least in this newsgroup. This is easily verified by
noting the number of participants in even the longest threads.

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
re************************@att.net
Nov 14 '05 #14

P: n/a
Chris McDonald wrote:
Ulrich Hobelmann <u.*********@web.de> writes:

I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified
otherwise, just because they developed first and because their
users speak English. German newsgroups, for instance, are part of
the de.* hierarchy. I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too.


It's no restriction, just a convention. It's like not going into
an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the
waiter/waitress for ordering food.

We all certainly appreciate that there are conventions, but I am
uncomfortable with suggestions that languages other than English don't
belong in newgroups that have traditionally used English (outbursts are
increasingly seen). One can argue that USENET is dying a slow death,
and maybe hundreds on millions of Chinese won't even start using it.
But given how closely guarded topics of discussion must be in this
newsgroup to receive helpful responses, let's hope that someone will
provide definitive answers in cn.comp.lang.c. too.


Aber ich finde es ziemlich unhflich, in ein englisches Forum
einfach deutschen Kram zu posten, nur weil mir gerade danach ist.

Isn't that kind of rude?

Seriously, they are free to post their language in their
newsgroups. If I wanted to write German stuff or other languages,
I'd go look for groups in that language.

I'm sure that lots of Chinese have their means of communication on
the internet. I'm thankful that they respect that these
newsgroups are English newsgroups, just as I respect that.

I don't post English stuff in Chinese groups either, cause they
might not understand it.

--
No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's
consent. -- Abraham Lincoln
Nov 14 '05 #15

P: n/a
Chris McDonald wrote:
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.net> writes:

Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage
newsgroups?


Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).


What are you on about? "English usage newsgroups" are about English
usage. The point, which you don't seem to understand, is that he posts
just as inappropriately to natural language newsgroups as he does to
computer language newsgroups.
Nov 14 '05 #16

P: n/a
Chris McDonald wrote:
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.net> writes:

Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage
newsgroups?


Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).


It seems all the other responses are from people who share your
inability to read. Nowhere do I suggest that any of the comp.lang.*
newsgroups are restricted to English. Just as he posts inappropriately
to comp.lang.* newsgroups, he post inappropriately to -- follow the
bouncing ball -- English usage newsgroups, such as alt.usage.english and
alt.english.usage. Damned right that English usage newsgroups are about
English usage. Jeez.
Nov 14 '05 #17

P: n/a
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.net> writes:
Chris McDonald wrote:
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.net> writes:
Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage
newsgroups?

Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).

It seems all the other responses are from people who share your
inability to read. Nowhere do I suggest that any of the comp.lang.*
newsgroups are restricted to English. Just as he posts inappropriately
to comp.lang.* newsgroups, he post inappropriately to -- follow the
bouncing ball -- English usage newsgroups, such as alt.usage.english and
alt.english.usage. Damned right that English usage newsgroups are about
English usage. Jeez.

Or you could get off your high horse, and explain your need to state
"(in Chinese characters)". Yes, inappropriate, we've all agreed on that.
Get over him; we have,

--
Chris.
Nov 14 '05 #18

P: n/a
On 27 Apr 2005 23:31:35 GMT, in comp.lang.c ,
ro******@ibd.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca (Walter Roberson) wrote:
In article <t6********************************@4ax.com>,
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote:
by convention, groups not prefixed with a national identifier such as
de, fr, etc are considered to be english language groups unless their
charter states otherwise. As with any unmoderated group, there's
nothing to enforce this except common sense.
I use a completely different convention.


You're obviously free to use any convention you like, but that doesn't
mean its the widely applied 'standard' convention. Its similar to
using nonstandard quote marks, or not setting word wrap, or posting in
mime to text-only groups.
The situation is no different than if you are in a bus/ train/
airplane and nearby people start talking in another language.
No, its completely different. To continue your analogy, its analogous
to someone entering a bus/train/aeroplane in the UK, and speaking
Polish to the bus driver.
If they aren't obviously trying to include you, then
they aren't talking to you.


But its not a conversation, its a question.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>
Nov 14 '05 #19

P: n/a
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:22:43 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Martin Ambuhl
<ma*****@earthlink.net> wrote:
Chris McDonald wrote:
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.net> writes:

Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage
newsgroups?


Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).


It seems all the other responses are from people who share your
inability to read.


Well, I was answering Chris' question, not commenting on what you
said, but its a fair point.

And posting chinese poetry in chinese to a newsgroup specialising in
usage of english is incredibly dumb, incredibly rude, or both.

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>
Nov 14 '05 #20

P: n/a
Ulrich Hobelmann <u.*********@web.de> scribbled the following
on comp.lang.c:
I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified
otherwise, just because they developed first and because their
users speak English. German newsgroups, for instance, are part of
the de.* hierarchy. I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too. It's no restriction, just a convention. It's like not going into
an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the
waiter/waitress for ordering food.


I'd think talking to a waiter/waitress for ordering food without going
to a restaurant first is a bit unusual, no matter what language you're
speaking in.

--
/-- Joona Palaste (pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi) ------------- Finland --------\
\-------------------------------------------------------- rules! --------/
"I will never display my bum in public again."
- Homer Simpson
Nov 14 '05 #21

P: n/a
Joona I Palaste wrote:
Ulrich Hobelmann <u.*********@web.de> scribbled the following
on comp.lang.c:
I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified
otherwise, just because they developed first and because their
users speak English. German newsgroups, for instance, are part of
the de.* hierarchy. I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too.


It's no restriction, just a convention. It's like not going into
an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the
waiter/waitress for ordering food.

I'd think talking to a waiter/waitress for ordering food without going
to a restaurant first is a bit unusual, no matter what language you're
speaking in.


No, I meant the convention is, "not (going ... and ordering in
Chinese ...)".

--
No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's
consent. -- Abraham Lincoln
Nov 14 '05 #22

P: n/a

Sunnan wrote:
Chris McDonald wrote:
Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).

.i jimte mu'i lenu lo skamysnu pe lo bangu poi ke'a cu frica lei

glico ku'o cu zasti


Lojban should be banned, of course.

Nov 14 '05 #23

P: n/a
Ulrich Hobelmann <u.*********@web.de> scribbled the following
on comp.lang.c:
Joona I Palaste wrote:
Ulrich Hobelmann <u.*********@web.de> scribbled the following
on comp.lang.c:
I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified
otherwise, just because they developed first and because their
users speak English. German newsgroups, for instance, are part of
the de.* hierarchy. I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too.
It's no restriction, just a convention. It's like not going into
an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the
waiter/waitress for ordering food.

I'd think talking to a waiter/waitress for ordering food without going
to a restaurant first is a bit unusual, no matter what language you're
speaking in.

No, I meant the convention is, "not (going ... and ordering in
Chinese ...)".


Oh, right. I read it as "(not going ...) and (ordering in Chinese ...)".
One of the wonders of ambiguiety in natural languages.

--
/-- Joona Palaste (pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi) ------------- Finland --------\
\-------------------------------------------------------- rules! --------/
"You have moved your mouse, for these changes to take effect you must shut down
and restart your computer. Do you want to restart your computer now?"
- Karri Kalpio
Nov 14 '05 #24

P: n/a
On 2 May 2005 16:04:10 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Joona I Palaste
<pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi> wrote:
One of the wonders of ambiguiety in natural languages.


man eating tiger, anyone?

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Nov 14 '05 #25

P: n/a
da**********@gmail.com wrote:
Sunnan wrote:
Chris McDonald wrote:
Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).


.i jimte mu'i lenu lo skamysnu pe lo bangu poi ke'a cu frica lei


glico
ku'o cu zasti

Lojban should be banned, of course.


..iecaizo'o
Nov 14 '05 #26

P: n/a
Sunnan <su****@handgranat.org> wrote:
da**********@gmail.com wrote:
Sunnan wrote:
Chris McDonald wrote:

Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).

.i jimte mu'i lenu lo skamysnu pe lo bangu poi ke'a cu frica lei


glico
ku'o cu zasti


Lojban should be banned, of course.


.iecaizo'o


All languages in which a full stop is anything other than punctuation
(i.e., in which they can be part of a word) are evil, and should be
banned. This goes for both natural, fictional human, and computer
languages (e.g., some Basics).

Richard
Nov 14 '05 #27

P: n/a
On Tue, 03 May 2005 07:20:04 +0000, Richard Bos wrote:

All languages in which a full stop is anything other than punctuation
(i.e., in which they can be part of a word) are evil, and should be
banned. This goes for both natural, fictional human, and computer
languages (e.g., some Basics).


Sending methods to objects? e.g. foo.bar()

--
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good,
you'll have to ram them down people's throats."
-- Howard Aiken
Nov 14 '05 #28

P: n/a
GuyBrush Treepwood <sp*****@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 03 May 2005 07:20:04 +0000, Richard Bos wrote:

All languages in which a full stop is anything other than punctuation
(i.e., in which they can be part of a word) are evil, and should be
banned. This goes for both natural, fictional human, and computer
languages (e.g., some Basics).


Sending methods to objects? e.g. foo.bar()


All languages in which you can send methods to objects are evil, too :-P
But no, I consider that to be punctuation: separating the word "foo"
from the word "bar". In at least a couple of kinds of MS Basic, you
could write this.is.a.single.variable.name and it would in fact refer to
a single variable, not to parts of a structure.

Richard
Nov 14 '05 #29

P: n/a
Richard Bos wrote:
.iecaizo'o

All languages in which a full stop is anything other than punctuation
(i.e., in which they can be part of a word) are evil, and should be
banned.


In Scheme you can use the period sign in identifyers:

(define this.is.unusual 4)
this.is.unusual
=> 4

But I've never seen this in practice. I don't see where the evilness
comes from.

In Lojban a full stop is punctuation - meaning a small pause when
speaking - it's just that this punctuation is used differently than in
English. I wouldn't call it "part of words".

..e'anaizo'o mi cu tolcru.zo'o le lojbo lenu lo krinu cu drata
Nov 14 '05 #30

P: n/a
Richard Bos wrote:
Sunnan <su****@handgranat.org> wrote:

da**********@gmail.com wrote:
Sunnan wrote:
Chris McDonald wrote:
>Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?

>From where comes the restriction? (and it obviously doesn't work).

.i jimte mu'i lenu lo skamysnu pe lo bangu poi ke'a cu frica lei

glico
ku'o cu zasti

Lojban should be banned, of course.


.iecaizo'o

All languages in which a full stop is anything other than punctuation
(i.e., in which they can be part of a word) are evil, and should be
banned. This goes for both natural, fictional human, and computer
languages (e.g., some Basics).


Who can disagree with that? However, no languages actually do this.
They use periods, or even dots, instead. While these may look the same
as a "full stop" to the untrained eye, they can be distinguished by
their lack of evilness when used in suspiciously un-punctuation-like
ways. In addition, only full stops have a British accent (usually
Gloucestershire).

Anton
Nov 14 '05 #31

P: n/a
rl*@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
All languages in which you can send methods to objects are evil, too :-P
But no, I consider that to be punctuation: separating the word "foo"
from the word "bar". In at least a couple of kinds of MS Basic, you
could write this.is.a.single.variable.name and it would in fact refer to
a single variable, not to parts of a structure.
like...
(define this.is.a.single.variable.name 'hello.richard-boos) ; no values returned this.is.a.single.variable.name 'hello.richard-boos


;-)

mkb.

[Of course we all know Scheme and Lisp are evil.. *cackling-maniacally*]

Nov 14 '05 #32

P: n/a
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:17:21 +0000, Martin Ambuhl wrote:
Chris McDonald wrote:
Martin Ambuhl <ma*****@earthlink.net> writes:

Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage
newsgroups?


Maybe he's writing about english usage in Chinese?
(I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt :-}

-jeff
Nov 14 '05 #33

P: n/a
Xah Lee wrote:
The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines

20050222

Computing Folks of the industry:

please spread the debunking of the truncating line business of the
fucking unix-loving fuckheads, as outlines here:
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/w...cate_line.html

if this myth-debunking is known widely enough, there wouldn't be any

EOL ("\n") is like <p></p> or <br>

but it has a different syntax.

So it's logical too.

Ciao,
Oliver
Nov 14 '05 #34

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.