On Friday, July 05, 2013 22:46:59 Namespace wrote: > On Friday, 5 July 2013 at 20:34:26 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote: > > On 07/05/2013 10:09 PM, Namespace wrote: > >>> Unary ~ is bitwise not in Java and D, and he is referring to > >>> binary > >>> usage. > >>> > >>> [...] use ~ for _any_ purpose. > >> > >> I'd expected that *any* really means *any* and do not refer to > >> binary. > > > > Yes. Neither do 'use', 'for' and 'purpose'. Establishing that > > it is likely that ~ is referring to binary requires some more > > context (eg. it is likely that the two usages of ~ in his post > > refer to the same thing), common sense or the assumption that > > Jonathan probably knows about the unary usage. (Parsing natural > > language is quite hard though, so I could be wrong.) > > Spoken like a true human Compiler. :)
LOL. Natural language is even more ambiguous than HTML, and we know how bad that can get. Every person is emitting and receiving slightly different versions of whatever natural language they're communicated in, and it's that much worse when it's pure text without body language. And that's with a _human_ deciphering it. It's a miracle that computers ever get much of anywhere with it. - Jonathan M Davis
