Re: Please tell the following to your buddies, Kurt.

[miguel <mjc101@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 04:22:14 +1000, Lionel <usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:54:43 +0545, "Kadaitcha Man"
><nntp.news@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>Lionel <usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Thou blubbery notorious bawd. Thou
>>cockeyed fathead. Ye snarled:
>>
>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 21:30:21 +0545, "Kadaitcha Man"
>>> <nntp.news@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Art Deco <erfc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Thou bed-swerver. Thou speaks nothing
>>>> but madman. Ye squealed:
>>>>
>>>>> The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In sci.physics, T Wake
>>>>>> <usenet.es7at@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>> on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 19:43:31 +0100
>>>>>> <XYednSzcx8LOPLLbnZ2dnUVZ8qminZ2d@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Art Deco" <erfc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:250420070913481255%erfc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>>> JeffSRelf <Jeff_Relf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please tell the following to your buddies, Kurt,
>>>>>>>>> and then report back to me.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Although physical processes determine absolutely everything,
>>>>>>>>> so that the future is just as fixed as the past,
>>>>>>>>> time is a spatial dimension ( i.e. falsely directional ),
>>>>>>>>> and we are 4-D rocks, static and immutable...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's impossible to imagine. Yet gravity is modeled that way.
>>>>>>>>> In General Relativity, time is spatial.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All changes ( including choices ) are merely notional, not real.
>>>>>>>>> Likewise, entropy is merely notional.  PseudoEntropy is our
>>>>>>>>> PseudoGod. As God, PseudoEntropy creats, " uses " and then
>>>>>>>>> destroys us.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No underscores in this post, Jeff?  What's up with that?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He got so excited at the chance to talk nonsense about time being
>>>>>>> a spatial dimension, that he forgot his "signature" writing
>>>>>>> style....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just love the way he abuses English...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't want to know how he abuses C++.... :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I take it he's never read Stroustrup, Cline, and Meyers then?
>>>>
>>>> GitM is not correct about the Relf's C++ abuse. Abuse is not a
>>>> suitable euphemism for any of capricious butchery, wanton rape or
>>>> willful pillage.
>>>
>>> How do you tell the difference between that & any other kind of C++
>>> code?
>>
>>Easy...
>>
>>Some Berserker code:
>>
>>public bool SelectGroup(string sGroup)
>>{
>> bool bZ;
>> string[] sValues;
>>
>> bZ = _SendCommand("GROUP " + sGroup, NewsResponse.Server.GroupSelected);
>>
>> if (bZ == true)
>> {
>>   sValues = Split(m_sLastServerMessage);
>>   m_ArticleCount = Val(sValues(1));
>>   m_FirstArticle = Val(sValues(2));
>>   m_LastArticle = Val(sValues(3));
>> }
>> else
>> {
>>   m_ArticleCount = 0;
>>   m_FirstArticle = 0;
>>   m_LastArticle = 0;
>>   if (m_bUseExceptions == true) {
>>     throw new NewsException(m_nLastServerCode, m_sLastServerMessage);
>>   }
>>
>> if (Done != null)
>> {
>>   Done(NewsResponse.Method.SelectGroup, m_nLastServerCode,
>>          m_sLastServerMessage);
>> }
>>
>> return bZ;
>>}
>>
>>
>>The Relf Version of the same code:
>>
>>public bool SelectGroup(stringsGroup)
>>
>>{boolbZ;string[]sValues;bZ=_SendCommand("GROUP"+sGroup,NewsResponse.Server.GroupSelected);
>>if(bZ==true){sValues=Split(m_sLastServerMessage);m_ArticleCount=Val(sValues(1));
>>m_FirstArticle=Val(sValues(2));m_LastArticle=Val(sValues(3));}else{m_ArticleCount=0;
>>m_FirstArticle=0;m_LastArticle=0;if(m_bUseExceptions==true)
>>{thrownewNewsException(m_nLastServerCode,m_sLastServerMessage);
>>}}if(Done!=null)
>>{Done(NewsResponse.Method.SelectGroup,m_nLastServerCode,m_sLastServerMessage);
>>}returnbZ;}
>
>Yeah, the second chunk is more disgusting than the first, but only in
>sense that sex with Porchy is more disgusting than sex with Porchy's
>mom.
>(Can you tell that I don't like C++?)

Gather round. Nerd gimp retard fagbois discuss coding in AUK.