 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:08:49 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>> Yes, I had noticed that as well - beautifully done, everyone! ;-)
>>> Yes, yes, it was me, I plead guilty, and at the count of three I pull
>>> back the duvet, make may way to the refrigerator, one dry potatoe
>>> inside... er, wait...
>>
>> LOL
>
> *bows*
>
> 10 points for naming the source.
cookie.h, line 15. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> *bows*
>>
>> 10 points for naming the source.
>
> cookie.h, line 15. :-)
LOL! That's almost worth a point...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-2-2009 20:08, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>> Yes, I had noticed that as well - beautifully done, everyone! ;-)
>>> Yes, yes, it was me, I plead guilty, and at the count of three I pull
>>> back the duvet, make may way to the refrigerator, one dry potatoe
>>> inside... er, wait...
>>
>> LOL
>
> *bows*
>
> 10 points for naming the source.
>
I think it would be possible to find it using google, but I prefer to go
to sleep early tonight.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:41:11 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> *bows*
>>>
>>> 10 points for naming the source.
>>
>> cookie.h, line 15. :-)
>
> LOL! That's almost worth a point...
Well, I was wrong, it was line 16. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/16/2009 12:12 PM, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Haskell isn't C. It's not trying to be, either.
>
> As far as Warp is concerned, "it's not efficient == it's not worth using".
There are different types of efficiency, you know. When I said,
"Haskell isn't C," I wasn't saying that Haskell isn't efficient. On the
contrary, Haskell is (apparently) extremely efficient.
C gives the programmer a tremendous ability to economize memory usage
and CPU cycles.
Haskell, on the other hand, economizes programmer's productivity.
With C, you can do a lot with a small device (which is where C remains
in common usage, that is, embedded systems). With Haskell, you can do a
lot in a short time (at least, that's what I understand it to be).
>> What about when so many otherwise rational, intelligent people all say
>> you're smart & they like you? Who are going to listen to?
>
> They're generally not very vocal.
I can remember at least two or three times you posted really negative
thoughts about yourself on this NG, and received a deluge of positive
responses from us. We're not vocal in other NGs*, but we are here.
*Actually, many other forums I've seen have nowhere near the civility of
the POV groups. About the only ones I've seen that do are the ClanLib
forums, and the Kevin's Watch message board.
--
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/18/2009 11:08 AM, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>> Yes, I had noticed that as well - beautifully done, everyone! ;-)
>>> Yes, yes, it was me, I plead guilty, and at the count of three I pull
>>> back the duvet, make may way to the refrigerator, one dry potatoe
>>> inside... er, wait...
>>
>> LOL
>
> *bows*
>
> 10 points for naming the source.
>
Here, let me google that for you... ;)
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22one+dry+potato+inside%22
http://tinyurl.com/ck9wt6
In either case, it's the second link.
--
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/16/2009 1:02 PM, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> SMTP, unfortunately.
Wait, do you mean it's an *actual* mailing list?
:o
I thought those died out, like, 10 years ago (at least as discussion
forums - they work quite well for bulletins or newsletters).
NNTP would be a great improvement (why did they flame you for THAT?), or
even a web-based forum (shudder!) would be better!
--
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/16/2009 7:56 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Welcome to the real world, Andrew. You're not going to rub everyone the
> right way all the time.
Too... many... jokes!!! :)
--
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/17/2009 11:01 AM, Mike Raiford wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> Clique -- A close-knit, usually exclusionary, group.
>>
>> Oh. Right.
>>
>> How the heck do you pronounce that?
>>
>
> Click
>
I always thought it was more "cleek," like "cheek."
--
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> SMTP, unfortunately.
>
> Wait, do you mean it's an *actual* mailing list?
Er, yes.
> I thought those died out, like, 10 years ago.
Er, yes.
When I originally joined the mailing list, at one point Don rightly
complained that messages from me made up 60% of the total list traffic.
Unfortunately, SMTP isn't like NNTP; it's not very easy to just ignore a
specific thread if it doesn't interest you. On a mailing list, if you
say something, *everybody* has to read through it.
I've been a lot quieter since then...
> NNTP would be a great improvement (why did they flame you for THAT?), or
> even a web-based forum (shudder!) would be better!
Somebody pointed out that a web-based forum forces you to use one
specific UI - the web forum. On the other hand, NNTP can be used from
*any* suitable client. It can also be easily archived and so forth.
Which seems like a valid point to me.
I'm still not understanding why NNTP isn't a valid solution...
(Most of the replies mumbled something about "Usenet". I have no idea
what that is or why that's relevant.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
