Re: += in ada

[Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>]

Russ <18k11tm001@sneakemail.com> wrote:
: I think those protestors are unpatriotic idiots. But here's the
: critical point. I don't think they are idiots *because* they are
: unpatriotic; I think they are unpatriotic *because* they are idiots.

Let me try to paraphrase.
I think those against :+ are unfashionate fools. But here's the
critical point. I don't think they are fools *because* they are
unfashionate; I think they are unfashionate *because* they are fools.

I have a question. I don't know English so well, and I'm trying
to find the exact references for "*because*". So do you claim any of the
following to be true:
- the non-:+ are fools, therefore they are unfashionate
- the non-:+ are unfashionate, therefore they are fools.
  (Thus, being fashionate (or modern) implies being smart?)
- the reason for my thinking that the non-:+ are unfashionate is that
  the non-:+ are fools.

The fashion tells the smart ones from the fools? How is that?


If, by analogy, you

- start out with a causal claim that idiots must be unpatriotic,
  when in fact mental sanity and patriotic feelings might just
  prove to be unrelated, and then go on and say that

- those who don't have patriotic feelings must be idiots,

there is no point in arguing this analogy because there is no common
basis for argument. If you don't accept that idiocy and patriotism
might not have anything to do with each other, the non-:+ (protesters)
might say whatever they want. As long as you start from "non-:+ is
idiocy", what can we talk about, when talking reasonably is, by definition,
not easily done by idiots?


:>  What it have to do with
:> efficiency?
: 
: I've explained this ad nauseum already,

And the details seem to have slipped, now and again.

: And yes, it is possible for a "smart" compiler to automatically
: implement the former with the efficiency of the latter, but current
: compilers don't, and more complicated examples would be *extremely*
: difficult for the compiler to optimize.

There has been a somewhat "ancient" posting, re-sent a few days
ago, proving the opposite.


Georg