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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f039470e8f537101
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-30 11:47:14 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!chi1.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!nwrdny02.gnilink.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.lhota.adarose@verizon.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <7u9Ua.13412$634.10307@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>
 <e2e5731a.0307251844.7ea4dab4@posting.google.com>
 <bDTUa.6456$AO6.976@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
 <e2e5731a.0307271419.4390a02c@posting.google.com> <ud6fvzbzc.fsf@xsol.com>
 <e2e5731a.0307281001.1ae5ed0c@posting.google.com>
 <1059416297.548253@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <lk7civoe7tqak5uq12e4rlk98b8m6jj2h6@4ax.com>
 <1059486223.780998@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <8tucivgbh5hkuicrpdeuavau8muf6a9mrh@4ax.com>
 <1059496557.747795@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <82347202.0307291339.1f8a6b65@posting.google.com>
 <1059517988.954409@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <u1xw89z8r.fsf@wanadoo.fr>
 <1059578357.691797@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
Subject: Re: Non-philosophical definition of Eiffel?
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID: <RoUVa.5013$Jz2.4915@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 18:47:13 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.203.204.244
X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net
X-Trace: nwrdny02.gnilink.net 1059590833 151.203.204.244 (Wed,
 30 Jul 2003 14:47:13 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 14:47:13 EDT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:41036
Date: 2003-07-30T18:47:13+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Hyman Rosen" <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1059578357.691797@master.nyc.kbcfp.com...
> Pascal Obry wrote:
> > As you said it is a trick
>
> Perhaps I should have said "technique" instead.

Can you clarify the difference between the terms "trick" and "technique"? Is
"technique" necessarily something else other than a dressed-up trick?

This reminds me of a cartoon I saw at the Alsys Waltham office. The top part
of this cartoon has an anthropomorphized, fat, ugly insect wearing grubby
clothes and a bowler, and smoking a cigar. Beneath this unappealing
anthropod is the caption "BUG". The bottom part of the cartoon shows exactly
the same insect, but with a few vital differences. In place of the bowler,
he is wearing a top hat. In place of the cigar, he now has a cigarette
holder. In place of the grubby clothes, the anthropod is wearing a tuxedo.
The caption under this second insect drawing reads "FEATURE".