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: 103376,99ab4bb580fc34cd X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Q: access to subprogram Date: 1996/07/15 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 169317242 references: <4s2tq3$fku@news.nyu.edu> <4sbtc5$uej@news.nyu.edu> <4sdt1i$nqa@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-07-15T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Fergus wrote "Well, there's still going to be a lot of Pentiums out there for quite some time -- I wouldn't call the issue entirely moot yet." moot means arguable and not yet decided -- I would say that's EXACTLY the right description here. Richard was saying that at this stage, the issue will probably stay arguable and undecided, which seems a reasonable assessment. (I suspect you meant MOOT as in "doesn't matter any more", but that is not what the word means in traditional usage, although I agree this US usage is (unfortunately) getting very common)