From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 111d6b,328622178ec8b832 X-Google-Attributes: gid111d6b,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,8775b19e3c68a5dc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fe9fa,98fc5666cffb859a X-Google-Attributes: gidfe9fa,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public X-Google-Thread: 10d15b,328622178ec8b832 X-Google-Attributes: gid10d15b,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: The Goobers Subject: Re: Which language pays most -- C++ vs. Java? Date: 1998/02/16 Message-ID: <34E84A8B.5DC4@erols.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 325548447 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <6at330$7uj$1@mainsrv.main.nc.us> <6bsddk$3cp$1@news.nyu.edu> <34E23B11.6AD8@erols.com> <6bti3r$e96$1@client3.news.psi.net> <6bv3no$b62@clarknet.clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: docdwarf@erols.com To: Flaagg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@erols.com X-Trace: winter.news.erols.com 887638741 16591 207.172.128.68 (16 Feb 1998 14:19:01 GMT) Organization: BudNy Organisation Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.misc,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.cobol,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.ada,alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk Date: 1998-02-16T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Flaagg wrote: > > In , Ethics Gradient > says... > > > In article <6bv3no$b62@clarknet.clark.net>, docdwarf@clark.net writes > > >In article <6bti3r$e96$1@client3.news.psi.net>, > > >Frank A. Adrian wrote: > > >>The Goobers wrote in message <34E23B11.6AD8@erols.com>... > > >>>Richard Kenner wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> The more a "programmer" knows, the more "well rounded" they are. > > >>>> I see no reason to set a limit to knowlege in any field: it's always > > >>>> better to know more than to know less. > > >>> > > >>>BLEARGH! > > >>> > > >>>Read this sentence again, please: > > >>> > > >>> 'The more a "programmer" knows, the more "well rounded" they are.' > > >>> > > >>>I realise that you are trying to avoid sex-specification ('The more a > > >>>"programmer" knows, the mofe "well rounded" he/she is.') but you BOTCHED > > >>>it... now, repeat after me: > > >>> > > >>>'Antecedants must agree with their consequent.' > > >>> > > >>>Notice the subtle ha-ha in this 'rule'? 'Antecedants' and 'their' are > > >>>plurals, 'consequent' is a singular... is make for good joke to > > >>>remembering Eenglish to be doing by, no? > > >>> > > >>>In your sentence 'programmer' is singular, 'knows' is singular, 'they' > > >>>and 'are' am be pluralismers. > > >>> > > >>>What *are* they teaching in schools nowadays? > > >>> > > >> > > >>*They* are teaching that in order to be politically correct in this day and > > >>age, in order to sooth ruffled feathers of those who insist on sex neutral > > >>language, one must sometimes wrinkle the ears of fuddy-duddy language > > >>purists with circumlocutions such as the sentence that caused you to go > > >>"BLEARGH!" > > > > > >At times, perhaps, this 'must' be done... in this case I can think of a > > >readily acceptable substitute. Is an abhorrence of lazy thinking another > > >symptom of that which you lable 'fuddy-duddiness'? > > > > > >> In some cases, other fuddy-duddy language purists' ears wrinkle > > >>upon hearing the phrase "his/her" or (even more noveau) the sex neutral > > >>linguistic proposal "te or tis". And, although most fuddy-duddy language > > >>purists *would* prefer that the whole sex-neutral language issue would go > > >>away allowing us to revert to good old masculine singular as a generic > > >>singular term for a person, as with sex the controversy appears to be here > > >>for quite a while longer. > > >> > > >>In short, lighten up, Mr. Language Pedant. > > > > > >Mr? Why do you call me 'Mr'? Permit me to offer you a challenge, Mr > > >Adrian... I say there is a simple, readily accepted substitute for this > > >instance of antecedant/consequent disagreement. I say, further, that you > > >can neither generate it yourself nor, after I generate it, give any > > >passable reason as to *why* this antecedant/consequent disagreement is > > >superior to the alternative that you are obviously unable to generate. > > > > > >Are you up to the challenge, Mr Adrian? Do you say there is *no* > > >acceptable alternative to the abovecited disagreement... or that the > > >failure to find one is just a matter of laziness? > > > > > >DD > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >>Frank A. Adrian > > >>First DataBank > > >>frank_adrian@firstdatabank.com (W) > > >>franka@europa.com (H) > > >>This message does not necessarily reflect those of my employer, > > >>its parent company, or any of the co-subsidiaries of the parent > > >>company. > > >> > > >> > > > > This thread has just been put into alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk where > > Wee Saul, the Commander in Chief of the English language can reside. > > Grammar Confusion aside, all I know is this: > > There is a cheese sandwich sitting on my monitor, and I didn't make it > -or- put it there. Stilton, Muenster or Camelburke? DD