Re: choice of character for relational division
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2007 22:00:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4YVPh.18207$PV3.188740_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> that
>
>
> I'm just picking up on this now. Did the author mean "all the good symbols
> have been taken" instead of "all the good operators have been taken"?
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2007 22:00:32 GMT
Message-ID: <4YVPh.18207$PV3.188740_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
David Cressey wrote:
> "Marshall" <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1175445445.567586.212190_at_n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>>On Apr 1, 8:02 am, "Bruce C. Baker" <bcbake..._at_cox.net> wrote: >> >>>"Marshall" <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote in message >>> >>>news:1175417520.382456.123840_at_p15g2000hsd.googlegroups.com... >>> >>> >>>>On Mar 31, 11:01 pm, "Bruce C. Baker" <bcbake..._at_cox.net> wrote: >>> >>><snip Marshall's excellent responses to my posts> >>> >>>>>>I'll pick one of those. Okay, it's $. >>> >>>>>Your choice, of course,and FW( little )IW I'm cool with that. >>> >>>>>(I'm not trying to rain on your parade, Marshall; just pointing out
>
> that
>
>>>>>all the good operators have been taken! :-) )
>
> I'm just picking up on this now. Did the author mean "all the good symbols
> have been taken" instead of "all the good operators have been taken"?
Operators are symbols by definition. He didn't say that all the good operations have been taken. Received on Mon Apr 02 2007 - 00:00:32 CEST