From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Subject: Re: Under which category of types in the ARM do Natural and Positive fall?
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:53:34 -0500
Date: 2004-09-16T12:53:34-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dJGdnekpIcpHT9TcRVn-pA@megapath.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: opsefe48mv5afhvo@localhost
"Ed Falis" <falis@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:opsefe48mv5afhvo@localhost...
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 08:28:22 -0500, David C. Hoos
> <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com> wrote:
>
> > Well, "nothing" would be a fine answer, if it were a correct one.
>
>
> I think the joke was that the difference was "0"
>
> ;-)
Oh, wow, that was a joke? I think it needed a roadmap - thanks for giving us
one.
Randy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-16 17:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-13 13:04 Under which category of types in the ARM do Natural and Positive fall? matthias_k
2004-09-13 13:49 ` Peter Amey
2004-09-15 19:31 ` Under which category of types in the ARM do Natural and Positivefall? Joe Simon
2004-09-16 13:28 ` Under which category of types in the ARM do Natural and Positive fall? David C. Hoos
2004-09-16 15:40 ` Ed Falis
2004-09-16 17:53 ` Randy Brukardt [this message]
2004-09-16 18:02 ` Ed Falis
2004-09-16 23:05 ` Dale Stanbrough
2004-09-13 13:49 ` Björn Persson
2004-09-13 14:00 ` Martin Dowie
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox