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: 10d15b,328622178ec8b832 X-Google-Attributes: gid10d15b,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fe9fa,98fc5666cffb859a X-Google-Attributes: gidfe9fa,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 111d6b,328622178ec8b832 X-Google-Attributes: gid111d6b,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,8775b19e3c68a5dc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: weesaul@WEEwilhelp.com (WeeSaul) Subject: Re: Which language pays most -- C++ vs. Java? Date: 1998/02/16 Message-ID: <34e83f6a.2913619@news.usaor.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 325540442 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> Organization: Avast ye! NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 08:36:00 EST 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: On Fri, 13 Feb 1998 00:10:56 +0000, Ethics Gradient wrote: >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.' Correct English translation: The more a "programmer" knows, the more "well rounded" he is. ("he" used in a non-gender specific way) >>>>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? >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. Thank you so very much... The English language pays far better than C++ or Java... Learn the language, use it well, my children... WeeSaul mhm15x5 .-D Sorry, didn't read the rest of the post...