Timofei Shatrov wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 06:48:05 GMT, Mike Schilling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tried to confuse everyone with this
message:
Xah Lee wrote:
So, a simple code like this in normal languages:
becomes in Java:
Only when written by someone almost entirely ignorant of Java
bugbear wrote:
Er. How about
public class test {
public static void main(String[] args) {
String a = a string;
String b = another one;
StringBuffer c = a + b;
String c (etc.), that is.
System.out.println(c);
}
}
--
Xah Lee wrote:
So, a simple code like this in normal languages:
a = a string;
b = another one;
c = join(a,b);
print c;
or in lisp style
(set a a string)
(set b another one)
(set c (join a b))
(print c)
becomes in Java:
public class test {
public static void main(String[] args)
Philippa Cowderoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Mike Schilling wrote:
I'm not aware of any definition of libel that includes making statements
that are not provably true.
I believe UK law uses one that's close to it.
If I were to write
Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling wrote:
If I were to write, say, that Tony Blair's tax policy will lead to higher
deficits, I could be convicted of libel? Even if that's true, it's not a
priori provable.
I think what he
Mallor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I know I'm coming late to the barbeque. In passing, I ask: do you have
an objective, impartial perspective on the subject of committing
crimes? Because libel is a crime. It all depends on whether what you
state about Xah is
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chris Uppal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[apologies to the whole flaming crowd for sending this to the whole
flaming crowd...]
Geoffrey Summerhayes wrote:
After you kill Navarth, will it be nothing but gruff and deedle
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chris Uppal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[apologies to the whole flaming crowd for sending this to the whole
P.L.Hayes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I agree. I have already written to Dreamhost and I hope more people
will do so. I have found some of what has been posted here quite
astonishing and the actions of certain people to be reprehensible: by
far the most serious
Xah Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What is Expressiveness in a Computer Language
Xah Lee, 200502, 200603.
In languages human or computer, there's a notion of expressiveness.
English for example, is very expressive in manifestation, witness all
the poetry and
Roedy Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 17 Mar 2006 00:58:55 -0800, Fuzzyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
Hmmm... it displays fine via google groups. Maybe it's the reader which
is 'non-compliant' ?
I am using Agent.
David Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
There is no different to Microsoft beween a bare computer and one
preloaded with Linux or FreeBSD. One can quickly be converted to other
with minimal cost of effort. In the market, bare PCs really do compete
with
Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:17:14 +, axel wrote:
Employees have *no* obligations towards the shareholders of a company.
They are not employed or paid by the shareholders, they are employed
by the company itself which
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What matters in generating HTML is which browsers you want to support
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[ w3c standard v.s. ISO ]
You haven't said why you thinbk standards are more valuable than
recommendations. We apparently both agree
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roedy Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 18 Oct 2005 06:57:47 GMT, John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
or quoted :
That an HTML standard (ISO/IEC 15445:2000) and an HTML
recommendation by w3c (4.01 for example) are two
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, once more, why are standards *more valuable* than
recommendations?
standards are written by internationally recognized independent
organisations, v.s. everyone can write
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
One alternative, as I've said, is to write to the standards, and then
work around bugs in the popular browsers. If the public whim changes
which browser is most popular -
I am not holding my breath.
it only has minimal
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yup, but ISO C++ is a standard, and XML is a recommendation.
And the practical difference between the two
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roedy Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 16 Oct 2005 05:22:47 GMT, John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
or quoted :
No, it's a recommendation, an advise, nothing else. Otherwise they
would call it a standard. Why do you think
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What matters in generating HTML is which browsers you want to support and
what they understand. Standards and recommendations are both irrelevant.
Unless, of course, you want
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roedy Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 16 Oct 2005 05:22:47 GMT, John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Which standards? W3C doesn't make standards (they talk about working
drafts and recommendations), so nothing
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
No, it's a recommendation, an advise, nothing else. Otherwise they
would call it a standard. Why do you think W3C calls
John Bokma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Which standards? W3C doesn't make standards (they talk about working
drafts and recommendations), so nothing to warp there for MS.
Umm, a recommendation *is* a standard.
And Microsoft must disagree with you. When the spec
CBFalconer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling wrote:
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
l v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
Xah Lee wrote:
(circa 1996), and email should be text only (anti-MIME
Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Mike Schilling wrote:
Another advantage is that evewry internet-enabled computer today already
comes with an HTML renderer (AKA browser), so that a message saved to a
file
can be read very easily.
I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Mike Schilling wrote:
Another advantage is that evewry internet-enabled computer today
already
Denis Kasak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling wrote:
I see a difference between X would be useful for A, B, and C and Y
will always be the only proper way.
Don't you?
Y would not be useful because of the bandwidth it consumes, the malware
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
l v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Xah Lee wrote:
(circa 1996), and email should be text only (anti-MIME, circa 1995),
I think e-mail should be text
l v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Xah Lee wrote:
(circa 1996), and email should be text only (anti-MIME, circa 1995),
I think e-mail should be text only. I have both my email and news readers
set to display in plain text only. It prevents the marketeers and
Jürgen Exner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Xah Lee wrote:
Jargons of Info Tech industry
(A Love of Jargons)
Xah Lee, 2002 Feb
People in the computing field like to spur the use of spurious
jargons. The less educated they are, the more they like extraneous
34 matches
Mail list logo
