Well here's my "logic" on the matter. I wasn't criticizing him for not protesting, i was critizcing him for criticizing those who were. I wasn't having an actual opinion on the protest either way, eh, this is just getting stupid. Forget it. I'm just gonna chant "IBM!" for the rest of this post: "IBM! IBM! IBM! IBM!..."
It wasn't flamebait (or rather intended as flamebait), I was just severly annoyed that someone who seemed to be playing armchair activist was denouncing the actions/words of people who were actually there protesting. The original poster elucidated on the point he was trying to make, and I agree with him in some ways after the clarification. I still maintain that the concepts that the original poster I replied to with "flamebait" and you need to get a sense of humor:-p. I also admit that I unesscessarily extreme in expressing my opinion and I apoligize.
Were you there protesting? Considering your strong feelings on the matter, I'd imagine you'd be out there practically everyday, handcuffed to a post until they dropped the suit.
No kidding, while I was reading the article I was thinking to myself, hmm this seems familiar. I then realized I read the dead tree version of the article yesterday.
But isn't x times a condition? Unless x is a constant set by the language I suppose. But then you could still change the number of times by using multiples of x. loop { loop {//do something } }. True you couldn't loop an arbritary number of times, but you could get closer. Actually if you did something like... times = 3; loop { if tcount > times {//do nothing } else//do something tcount++; } The number of loops you'd use of course would depend on whatever x was hardocded to be but you could work around it. the only situation where you couldn't do anything with a hard-coded number of loop iterations would be if loop looped forever and there was no equivalent to break. Although if there was GOTO you could use it to exit the loop. Now I'm just rambling.
man SCREEN. Actually that doesn't work, but look up the SCREEN command. And the CIRCLE command and the LINE command. and PUT and GET for serious stuff. ah sweet sweet BASIC.
But then doesn't the analogy work even less? I always thought (GW/Q/whatever)Basic was pretty abstracted. It's more like moving from an automatic scooter, to a manual V8...eh...or not. I give up.
No no you're compressing all wrong. First you discard all zeroes... so 1101101001001 becomes 1111111. Now you represent any-length run of 1s with a 1. so 1111111 becomes 1. so it goes 1101101001001 -> 1.
Re:Still typos? Did it come with pdf version?
on
Mac OS X Hints
·
· Score: 1
Redundant? Oh the mods have been smoking the good stuff. Cmon you know its funny, you just don't wanbt to admit it.
Slashdot Mirror
You put your parents on Gentoo? You sick fsck.
well in this particular article they mention BSD as well, maybe some others I don't recall. But they definitely didn't say everything was GPL.
Well here's my "logic" on the matter. I wasn't criticizing him for not protesting, i was critizcing him for criticizing those who were. I wasn't having an actual opinion on the protest either way, eh, this is just getting stupid. Forget it. I'm just gonna chant "IBM!" for the rest of this post: "IBM! IBM! IBM! IBM!..."
Oh good. I thought I heard of this real-life FPS stuff before. I was hoping someone was gonna post a link.
Hmm, *Note to self: Next killing spree, paint 9mm bright orange.
Speaking as a fellow ex-high school student, which was it? You didn't have quarters, or the school didn't have payphones?
If he's your neighbor wouldn't something with slightly less range make more sense? Perhaps a nice bazooka?
It wasn't flamebait (or rather intended as flamebait), I was just severly annoyed that someone who seemed to be playing armchair activist was denouncing the actions/words of people who were actually there protesting. The original poster elucidated on the point he was trying to make, and I agree with him in some ways after the clarification. I still maintain that the concepts that the original poster I replied to with "flamebait" and you need to get a sense of humor :-p. I also admit that I unesscessarily extreme in expressing my opinion and I apoligize.
Were you there protesting? Considering your strong feelings on the matter, I'd imagine you'd be out there practically everyday, handcuffed to a post until they dropped the suit.
This man needs more funny mods.
OS X. Wow, apple really is the coolest.
"My...name...is...Caldera!"
No kidding, while I was reading the article I was thinking to myself, hmm this seems familiar. I then realized I read the dead tree version of the article yesterday.
But isn't x times a condition? Unless x is a constant set by the language I suppose. But then you could still change the number of times by using multiples of x. loop { loop { //do something } }. True you couldn't loop an arbritary number of times, but you could get closer. Actually if you did something like... times = 3; loop { if tcount > times { //do nothing } else //do something tcount++; } The number of loops you'd use of course would depend on whatever x was hardocded to be but you could work around it. the only situation where you couldn't do anything with a hard-coded number of loop iterations would be if loop looped forever and there was no equivalent to break. Although if there was GOTO you could use it to exit the loop. Now I'm just rambling.
man SCREEN. Actually that doesn't work, but look up the SCREEN command. And the CIRCLE command and the LINE command. and PUT and GET for serious stuff. ah sweet sweet BASIC.
Is there such a thing as a non-conditional loop? Oh right, GOTO.
$ echo `expr $a + $b`
But then doesn't the analogy work even less? I always thought (GW/Q/whatever)Basic was pretty abstracted. It's more like moving from an automatic scooter, to a manual V8...eh...or not. I give up.
Meanwhile, the architect's dialogue was written by some humans. Oh yes, it's impossible to understand.
Sheesh, Jet 3.0.0? Talk about version number inflation.
No no you're compressing all wrong. First you discard all zeroes... so 1101101001001 becomes 1111111. Now you represent any-length run of 1s with a 1. so 1111111 becomes 1. so it goes 1101101001001 -> 1.
Redundant? Oh the mods have been smoking the good stuff. Cmon you know its funny, you just don't wanbt to admit it.
I really hope that was sarcasm.
If emacs is the solution I'm not sure I want to know what the problem is. I kid of course.
writing ${vowel}e is an alternative way of expressing a character with an umlaut over it. Its perfectly valid German.