By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
445,847 Members | 2,206 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 445,847 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

C rulez

P: n/a
C rocks the world. Plain and simple. It's the ultimate solution,
period. Screw C++ and all the other ultra-high-level languages. If one
can't achieve in C what he wants, then he's obviously not up to the
job. Simplicity and expressiveness, that's what it's all about...

Mar 20 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
33 Replies


P: n/a
On Mar 20, 2:00 pm, klaushuot...@gmail.com wrote:
C rocks the world. Plain and simple. It's the ultimate solution,
period. Screw C++ and all the other ultra-high-level languages. If one
can't achieve in C what he wants, then he's obviously not up to the
job. Simplicity and expressiveness, that's what it's all about...
Every tool should be a screwdriver.
You can hammer with it, if you pound hard enough.
You can pry with it -- just like a crowbar.

Or, perhaps, there are room for other tools in the bag.

Mar 20 '07 #2

P: n/a
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:04:02 -0500, user923005 wrote
(in article <11*********************@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.c om>):
On Mar 20, 2:00 pm, klaushuot...@gmail.com wrote:
>C rocks the world. Plain and simple. It's the ultimate solution,
period. Screw C++ and all the other ultra-high-level languages. If one
can't achieve in C what he wants, then he's obviously not up to the
job. Simplicity and expressiveness, that's what it's all about...

Every tool should be a screwdriver.
You can hammer with it, if you pound hard enough.
You can pry with it -- just like a crowbar.
Ever try to cut down a tree with a screwdriver, or weld with one?

So much for that theory.
--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those
who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

Mar 20 '07 #3

P: n/a
On Mar 20, 2:18 pm, Randy Howard <randyhow...@FOOverizonBAR.net>
wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:04:02 -0500, user923005 wrote
(in article <1174424642.427375.55...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.c om>):
On Mar 20, 2:00 pm, klaushuot...@gmail.com wrote:
C rocks the world. Plain and simple. It's the ultimate solution,
period. Screw C++ and all the other ultra-high-level languages. If one
can't achieve in C what he wants, then he's obviously not up to the
job. Simplicity and expressiveness, that's what it's all about...
Every tool should be a screwdriver.
You can hammer with it, if you pound hard enough.
You can pry with it -- just like a crowbar.

Ever try to cut down a tree with a screwdriver,
Certainly, it's possible to do it.
or weld with one?
Why, you can even save money on the rod -- just attach the electrode
to the shaft and get going.
So much for that theory.
What? You mean there is enough room in the bag for more than one
tool?
{Please turn up your irony detector}
--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those
who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

Mar 20 '07 #4

P: n/a
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:18:49 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Randy Howard
<ra*********@FOOverizonBAR.netwrote:
>On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:04:02 -0500, user923005 wrote
(in article <11*********************@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.c om>):
>On Mar 20, 2:00 pm, klaushuot...@gmail.com wrote:
>>C rocks the world. Plain and simple. It's the ultimate solution,
period. Screw C++ and all the other ultra-high-level languages. If one
can't achieve in C what he wants, then he's obviously not up to the
job. Simplicity and expressiveness, that's what it's all about...

Every tool should be a screwdriver.
You can hammer with it, if you pound hard enough.
You can pry with it -- just like a crowbar.

Ever try to cut down a tree with a screwdriver, or weld with one?
Apparently the word "Sarcasm" isn't in the dictionary.
>So much for that theory.
mmmmmm.
--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
Mar 20 '07 #5

P: n/a
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrites:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:18:49 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Randy Howard
<ra*********@FOOverizonBAR.netwrote:
>>On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:04:02 -0500, user923005 wrote
(in article <11*********************@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.c om>):
>>On Mar 20, 2:00 pm, klaushuot...@gmail.com wrote:
C rocks the world. Plain and simple. It's the ultimate solution,
period. Screw C++ and all the other ultra-high-level languages. If one
can't achieve in C what he wants, then he's obviously not up to the
job. Simplicity and expressiveness, that's what it's all about...

Every tool should be a screwdriver.
You can hammer with it, if you pound hard enough.
You can pry with it -- just like a crowbar.

Ever try to cut down a tree with a screwdriver, or weld with one?

Apparently the word "Sarcasm" isn't in the dictionary.
No, it's in the thesaurus.

--
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."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Mar 21 '07 #6

P: n/a
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:29:59 -0700, in comp.lang.c , Keith Thompson
<ks***@mib.orgwrote:
>Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrites:
>On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:18:49 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Randy Howard
<ra*********@FOOverizonBAR.netwrote:
>>>On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:04:02 -0500, user923005 wrote
(in article <11*********************@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.c om>):

On Mar 20, 2:00 pm, klaushuot...@gmail.com wrote:
C rocks the world. Plain and simple. It's the ultimate solution,
period. Screw C++ and all the other ultra-high-level languages. If one
can't achieve in C what he wants, then he's obviously not up to the
job. Simplicity and expressiveness, that's what it's all about...

Every tool should be a screwdriver.
You can hammer with it, if you pound hard enough.
You can pry with it -- just like a crowbar.

Ever try to cut down a tree with a screwdriver, or weld with one?

Apparently the word "Sarcasm" isn't in the dictionary.

No, it's in the thesaurus.
Isn't that a sort of dinosaur?
--
Mark McIntyre

"The lusers I know are so clueless, that if they were dipped in clue
musk and dropped in the middle of pack of horny clues, on clue prom
night during clue happy hour, they still couldn't get a clue."
--Michael Girdwood, in the monastery
Mar 21 '07 #7

P: n/a
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrites:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:29:59 -0700, in comp.lang.c , Keith Thompson
<ks***@mib.orgwrote:
>>Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrites:
>>On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:18:49 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Randy Howard
<ra*********@FOOverizonBAR.netwrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:04:02 -0500, user923005 wrote
(in article <11*********************@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.c om>):

On Mar 20, 2:00 pm, klaushuot...@gmail.com wrote:
>C rocks the world. Plain and simple. It's the ultimate solution,
>period. Screw C++ and all the other ultra-high-level languages. If one
>can't achieve in C what he wants, then he's obviously not up to the
>job. Simplicity and expressiveness, that's what it's all about...
>
Every tool should be a screwdriver.
You can hammer with it, if you pound hard enough.
You can pry with it -- just like a crowbar.

Ever try to cut down a tree with a screwdriver, or weld with one?

Apparently the word "Sarcasm" isn't in the dictionary.

No, it's in the thesaurus.

Isn't that a sort of dinosaur?
Ironically, "dinosaur" isn't in my thesaurus (or synonymicon).

And that's probably just about enough of that.

--
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."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Mar 21 '07 #8

P: n/a
On Mar 20, 6:10 pm, Keith Thompson <k...@mib.orgwrote:
Mark McIntyre <markmcint...@spamcop.netwrites:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:29:59 -0700, in comp.lang.c , Keith Thompson
<k...@mib.orgwrote:
>Mark McIntyre <markmcint...@spamcop.netwrites:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:18:49 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Randy Howard
<randyhow...@FOOverizonBAR.netwrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:04:02 -0500, user923005 wrote
(in article <1174424642.427375.55...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.c om>):
>>>On Mar 20, 2:00 pm, klaushuot...@gmail.com wrote:
C rocks the world. Plain and simple. It's the ultimate solution,
period. Screw C++ and all the other ultra-high-level languages. If one
can't achieve in C what he wants, then he's obviously not up to the
job. Simplicity and expressiveness, that's what it's all about...
>>>Every tool should be a screwdriver.
You can hammer with it, if you pound hard enough.
You can pry with it -- just like a crowbar.
>>>Ever try to cut down a tree with a screwdriver, or weld with one?
>Apparently the word "Sarcasm" isn't in the dictionary.
>No, it's in the thesaurus.
Isn't that a sort of dinosaur?

Ironically, "dinosaur" isn't in my thesaurus (or synonymicon).

And that's probably just about enough of that.
Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word?
I have to give Kibo credit for this one. For ages, I thought it was a
real word.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) k...@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."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Mar 21 '07 #9

P: n/a
On Mar 20, 7:00 pm, "user923005" <dcor...@connx.comwrote:
On Mar 20, 6:10 pm, Keith Thompson <k...@mib.orgwrote:


Mark McIntyre <markmcint...@spamcop.netwrites:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:29:59 -0700, in comp.lang.c , Keith Thompson
<k...@mib.orgwrote:
>>Mark McIntyre <markmcint...@spamcop.netwrites:
>>On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:18:49 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Randy Howard
>><randyhow...@FOOverizonBAR.netwrote:
>>>>On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:04:02 -0500, user923005 wrote
>>>>(in article <1174424642.427375.55...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.c om>):
>>>>On Mar 20, 2:00 pm, klaushuot...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>C rocks the world. Plain and simple. It's the ultimate solution,
>>>>>period. Screw C++ and all the other ultra-high-level languages. If one
>>>>>can't achieve in C what he wants, then he's obviously not up to the
>>>>>job. Simplicity and expressiveness, that's what it's all about...
>>>>Every tool should be a screwdriver.
>>>>You can hammer with it, if you pound hard enough.
>>>>You can pry with it -- just like a crowbar.
>>>>Ever try to cut down a tree with a screwdriver, or weld with one?
>>Apparently the word "Sarcasm" isn't in the dictionary.
>>No, it's in the thesaurus.
Isn't that a sort of dinosaur?
Ironically, "dinosaur" isn't in my thesaurus (or synonymicon).
And that's probably just about enough of that.

Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word?
I have to give Kibo credit for this one. For ages, I thought it was a
real word.
<OT-METER-PEGGED>
I realize a statement as bold as that *cannot* stand bare and alone
without proof.
So here it is:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.o...7351c6aeec67e2
</OT-METER-PEGGED>

Mar 21 '07 #10

P: n/a
user923005 wrote:
>
.... snip ...
>
Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word? I have to give Kibo credit for this one. For ages, I
thought it was a real word.
Funny thing, it appears in my dictionary. Maybe you have the
expurgated edition? There is an argument for intrinsic
recursiveness.

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Mar 21 '07 #11

P: n/a
user923005 said:
Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word?
My dictionary (Chambers 1993) has nothing between "manna" and
"Marsilea". So "mantle", "map", and "marinade" are not real dictionary
words either.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
Mar 21 '07 #12

P: n/a
In article <Zp******************************@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:
>Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word?
>My dictionary (Chambers 1993) has nothing between "manna" and
"Marsilea". So "mantle", "map", and "marinade" are not real dictionary
words either.
Oh dear.

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
Mar 21 '07 #13

P: n/a
Richard Tobin said:
In article <Zp******************************@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:
>>Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word?
>>My dictionary (Chambers 1993) has nothing between "manna" and
"Marsilea". So "mantle", "map", and "marinade" are not real dictionary
words either.

Oh dear.
Fraid so. :-( It goes straight from page 1018 to page 1027. A printing
error, presumably.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
Mar 21 '07 #14

P: n/a
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:01:12 +0000, Richard Heathfield
<rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:
>Richard Tobin said:
>In article <Zp******************************@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:
>>>Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word?
>>>My dictionary (Chambers 1993) has nothing between "manna" and
"Marsilea". So "mantle", "map", and "marinade" are not real dictionary
words either.

Oh dear.

Fraid so. :-( It goes straight from page 1018 to page 1027. A printing
error, presumably.
Even worse, does that mean that 1019 through 1026 are not real
numbers?

--
Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ
Mar 21 '07 #15

P: n/a
Al Balmer said:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:01:12 +0000, Richard Heathfield
<rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:
>>Richard Tobin said:
>>In article <Zp******************************@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real
dictionary word?

My dictionary (Chambers 1993) has nothing between "manna" and
"Marsilea". So "mantle", "map", and "marinade" are not real
dictionary words either.

Oh dear.

Fraid so. :-( It goes straight from page 1018 to page 1027. A
printing error, presumably.

Even worse, does that mean that 1019 through 1026 are not real
numbers?
Ah, now I think you're being a little irrational. :-)

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
Mar 21 '07 #16

P: n/a
Richard Heathfield wrote, On 21/03/07 16:23:
Al Balmer said:
>On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:01:12 +0000, Richard Heathfield
<rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:
>>Richard Tobin said:

In article <Zp******************************@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

>Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real
>dictionary word?
My dictionary (Chambers 1993) has nothing between "manna" and
"Marsilea". So "mantle", "map", and "marinade" are not real
dictionary words either.
Oh dear.
Fraid so. :-( It goes straight from page 1018 to page 1027. A
printing error, presumably.
Even worse, does that mean that 1019 through 1026 are not real
numbers?

Ah, now I think you're being a little irrational. :-)
# Imagine all the numbers
# It's easy if you try
# No page missing
# Marinade defined
# Imagine all the pages
# Imaginary words

I'll get my coat.
--
Flash Gordon
Mar 21 '07 #17

P: n/a
On Mar 20, 8:12 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.comwrote:
user923005 wrote:

... snip ...
Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word? I have to give Kibo credit for this one. For ages, I
thought it was a real word.

Funny thing, it appears in my dictionary. Maybe you have the
expurgated edition? There is an argument for intrinsic
recursiveness.
Did you look at my formal proof in message ID:
<11*********************@l75g2000hse.googlegroups. com>
--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

Mar 21 '07 #18

P: n/a
user923005 wrote:
>
On Mar 20, 8:12 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.comwrote:
user923005 wrote:

... snip ...
Yeah, but did you know that
'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word? I have to give Kibo credit for this one. For ages, I
thought it was a real word.
Funny thing, it appears in my dictionary. Maybe you have the
expurgated edition? There is an argument for intrinsic
recursiveness.

Did you look at my formal proof in message ID:
<11*********************@l75g2000hse.googlegroups. com>
I couldn't tell if CBFalconer was being serious.

--
pete
Mar 21 '07 #19

P: n/a
On Mar 21, 2:36 pm, pete <pfil...@mindspring.comwrote:
user923005 wrote:
On Mar 20, 8:12 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.comwrote:
user923005 wrote:
... snip ...
Yeah, but did you know that
'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word? I have to give Kibo credit for this one. For ages, I
thought it was a real word.
Funny thing, it appears in my dictionary. Maybe you have the
expurgated edition? There is an argument for intrinsic
recursiveness.
Did you look at my formal proof in message ID:
<1174443288.970578.39...@l75g2000hse.googlegroups. com>

I couldn't tell if CBFalconer was being serious.
The only thing worse than deadpan humor is when someone out-deadpans
you.
--
pete- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Mar 21 '07 #20

P: n/a
On Mar 21, 9:08 am, Al Balmer <albal...@att.netwrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:01:12 +0000, Richard Heathfield

<r...@see.sig.invalidwrote:
Richard Tobin said:
In article <Zp6dnSoX-5ltb53bnZ2dnUVZ8sein...@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalidwrote:
>>Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word?
>>My dictionary (Chambers 1993) has nothing between "manna" and
"Marsilea". So "mantle", "map", and "marinade" are not real dictionary
words either.
Oh dear.
Fraid so. :-( It goes straight from page 1018 to page 1027. A printing
error, presumably.

Even worse, does that mean that 1019 through 1026 are not real
numbers?
Don't worry. Integers are a pure subset of the reals.
--
Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Mar 21 '07 #21

P: n/a
Richard Heathfield wrote:
Al Balmer said:
>On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:01:12 +0000, Richard Heathfield
.... snip ...
>>>
Fraid so. :-( It goes straight from page 1018 to page 1027. A
printing error, presumably.

Even worse, does that mean that 1019 through 1026 are not real
numbers?

Ah, now I think you're being a little irrational. :-)
No, he is using imaginaries.

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Mar 22 '07 #22

P: n/a
pete wrote:
user923005 wrote:
>CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.comwrote:
>>user923005 wrote:

... snip ...

Yeah, but did you know that
'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word? I have to give Kibo credit for this one. For ages, I
thought it was a real word.

Funny thing, it appears in my dictionary. Maybe you have the
expurgated edition? There is an argument for intrinsic
recursiveness.

Did you look at my formal proof in message ID:
<11*********************@l75g2000hse.googlegroups. com>

I couldn't tell if CBFalconer was being serious.
First sentence, yes. Second, so so. Third, no.

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Mar 22 '07 #23

P: n/a
CBFalconer said:
Richard Heathfield wrote:
>Al Balmer said:
>>On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:01:12 +0000, Richard Heathfield
... snip ...
>>>>
Fraid so. :-( It goes straight from page 1018 to page 1027. A
printing error, presumably.

Even worse, does that mean that 1019 through 1026 are not real
numbers?

Ah, now I think you're being a little irrational. :-)

No, he is using imaginaries.
I think I'm developing a complex about this thread.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
Mar 22 '07 #24

P: n/a
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrites:
user923005 said:
>Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word?

My dictionary (Chambers 1993) has nothing between "manna" and
"Marsilea". So "mantle", "map", and "marinade" are not real dictionary
words either.
My dictionary has nothing between "nother" and "nothingness".

For that matter, it has nothing between "a" and "zymurgy".

--
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."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Mar 22 '07 #25

P: n/a
In article <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org>,
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrote:
>Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrites:
>My dictionary has nothing between "nother" and "nothingness".

For that matter, it has nothing between "a" and "zymurgy".
Nothing, or "nothing"?
dave

--
Dave Vandervies dj******@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
This is not supposed to demonstrate the most difficult way to write a web
page. It is supposed to demonstrate that composing functions from other
functions can actually be useful. --Bruce in comp.lang.scheme
Mar 22 '07 #26

P: n/a
dj******@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Dave Vandervies) writes:
In article <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org>,
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrote:
>>Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrites:
>>My dictionary has nothing between "nother" and "nothingness".

For that matter, it has nothing between "a" and "zymurgy".

Nothing, or "nothing"?
Yes.

--
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."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Mar 22 '07 #27

P: n/a
In article <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org>,
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrote:
>For that matter, it has nothing between "a" and "zymurgy".
Try holding it the other way round.

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
Mar 22 '07 #28

P: n/a
ri*****@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) wrote:
In article <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org>,
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrote:
For that matter, it has nothing between "a" and "zymurgy".

Try holding it the other way round.
Then it has 6uiy7ou between "h6jnwhz" and "e".

Richard
Mar 22 '07 #29

P: n/a
In article <46****************@news.xs4all.nl>,
Richard Bos <rl*@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nlwrote:
>For that matter, it has nothing between "a" and "zymurgy".

Try holding it the other way round.

Then it has 6uiy7ou between "h6jnwhz" and "e".
Very good, but I didn't mean hold it umop apisdn.

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
Mar 22 '07 #30

P: n/a
On Mar 21, 7:41 pm, Keith Thompson <k...@mib.orgwrote:
Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalidwrites:
user923005 said:
Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word?
My dictionary (Chambers 1993) has nothing between "manna" and
"Marsilea". So "mantle", "map", and "marinade" are not real dictionary
words either.

My dictionary has nothing between "nother" and "nothingness".

For that matter, it has nothing between "a" and "zymurgy".
My dictionary has an irrational entry, and a stupid one.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) k...@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."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

Mar 22 '07 #31

P: n/a
"user923005" <dc*****@connx.comwrites:
On Mar 21, 7:41 pm, Keith Thompson <k...@mib.orgwrote:
>Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalidwrites:
user923005 said:
Yeah, but did you know that 'gullible' isn't even a real dictionary
word?
My dictionary (Chambers 1993) has nothing between "manna" and
"Marsilea". So "mantle", "map", and "marinade" are not real dictionary
words either.

My dictionary has nothing between "nother" and "nothingness".

For that matter, it has nothing between "a" and "zymurgy".

My dictionary has an irrational entry, and a stupid one.
Mine has a misspelling, as well as a word that's spelled wrong.

--
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."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Mar 22 '07 #32

P: n/a
In article <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org>,
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrote:
>My dictionary has an irrational entry, and a stupid one.

Mine has a misspelling, as well as a word that's spelled wrong.
An edition of some Oxford dictionary - maybe the pocket one - came with
an erratum slip concerning the misspelling of misspelling as mispelling.

I am not making this up.

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
Mar 22 '07 #33

P: n/a
ri*****@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) wrote:
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrote:
My dictionary has an irrational entry, and a stupid one.
Mine has a misspelling, as well as a word that's spelled wrong.

An edition of some Oxford dictionary - maybe the pocket one - came with
an erratum slip concerning the misspelling of misspelling as mispelling.

I am not making this up.
I'd bet even money that that error was not accidental.

Richard
Mar 23 '07 #34

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.