Re: What does this NULL mean?
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 12:43:09 GMT
Message-ID: <xDyof.16345$V7.664_at_news-server.bigpond.net.au>
paul c wrote:
> dawn wrote:
>
>> Frank Hamersley wrote:
>>
[..]
>
> I don't know the guy but from his writings I'd guess he is plenty wise
> enough to know that and he is certainly not afraid to publicly change
> his mind.
I can't claim any better knowledge either, prior to a bit of googling...
> A darned good critic and more besides because he looks at how
> results are obtained and is competent to assess that was done. And he
> has produced and designed at the internals level. I gather he started
> at a legendary company "Leo computers" which somebody told me was
> started by a supermarket owner who couldn't get what he wanted from ICL!
...which confirms this. Not mentioned in 2e as I recall from my unreliable memory.
> IMHO, the hominem stuff about Date is a poor show in this group. We
> should pay more attention to what is being said.
Ah well as the adage goes "you know a man by the company he keeps" I felt sufficiently justified to enjoin his name, particularly as "they" (being DD&P) seem to me to have contributed to the hysteria that is NULL. I don't see the assessment as AH at all - but then I wouldn't being the author of the post.
In fact I reckon my request for analysis on Darwens statement even if is removed from its context exposes enough for me to take the swing at the pedestal. BTW it is apparently an inherent trait, nay accepted practice, where I hang out to try to lop the tall(er) poppies...that is as a last resort...the reflexive defense! ;-)
Now thats over are there comments on the substance of my challenge?
> As for valid alternative theories, that's fine, but they need to be more
> than theoretically valid. They have to be amenable to common computers
> and scaleable as well. Nobody worth reading, including Date, ever said
> the RM is the be-all and end-all. Date is saying that it hasn't been
> done properly, YET. He gives lots of evidence to back that up, SO FAR.
I have no doubt it might one day be improved...my message is the TTM as it stands appears way off beam...but that is simply an opinion of course.
[..] (I'm done with Ebert (who))!
Cheers,
Frank.
Received on Fri Dec 16 2005 - 13:43:09 CET