Re: Results in Parallel columns

From: x <>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:23:11 +0300
Message-ID: <e6rj8a$52j$>

Thank you for your comments.

"Erwin" <> wrote in message

> I also think it's pretty obvious that this is a *practical* question
> that might possibly better be posted elsewhere instead of in .THEORY.
> And I also think that your way of trying to make that clear is a bit
> more cryptographical than mine.

I noticed that many use a cryptographical style don't answer straight questions pretending they not see them or that are too obvious to be answered.

My "style" was not cryptographical at all. I simply asked what it means "parallel" when refering to columns and tables. Without an answer to this question, I cannot provide an answer.

> Furthermore, the problem is actually underspecified.

I've noticed. That's why I asked those silly questions.

> It does not say
> whether or not both result sets are guaranteed to have the same number
> of rows. It does not say whether the leftmost columns of both result
> sets (the ones that contain 1, 2 and 3 in the example) are in fact part
> of the result, or whether they are displayed in the post only for
> clarification purposes. etc. etc.

It does not say a lot of things.

> Someone in this forum sometimes makes statements about anyone who
> pretends to have answers to these kinds of question.

Yes. To any kind of questions. We only have stupidity, foolishness and more questions.

P.S. I forgot insults. Received on Thu Jun 15 2006 - 14:23:11 CEST

Original text of this message