Re: A different definition of MINUS, Part 3
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:46:08 -0800
Message-ID: <hCf4l.587$496.0_at_newsfe13.iad>
Brian Selzer wrote:
> "paul c" <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac> wrote in message
> news:5h83l.48993$mY6.41775_at_newsfe10.iad...
>> Cimode wrote: >> ... >>>> The whole notion that there is some algebraic solution to the "problem" >>>> is >>>> ludicrous. >>> paul c and Vadim never claimed that algebric expression of the problem >>> is the solution. They are only trying to rely on a formalism which >>> has proven to be effective. >>> ... >> Yes, nobody but Brian S has suggested that the A-algebra was put forth as >> providing a solution to a language implementation problem.
>
> There you go again attributing references to language implementation to me
> when it was...wait for it...YOU that brought up the whole notion of
> implementation.
> ...
Well, here we go again with the personal stuff. I have never seen it go anywhere productive, in this group or in the rest of my life. I know you like to play with words, as the stuff I've snipped would emphasize. I like to play with words too, but not when elemental definitions are involved. At least we have something in common, even if it is silly. Too bad for me I guess, but nothing new either.
I'm out of this thread and onto others I have in mind, so AFAIAC, you can have the last word in this one. Something tells me you will. Sometime I think I might send a Part 4 in order to try to coalesce a few matters but that would be a different thread I guess, and I got distracted today with references and FD's and started another thread. Hoping the deep thinkers will give me their criticism of that new thread. Received on Wed Dec 24 2008 - 01:46:08 CET