f



[OT] "its" vs. "it's"

In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".Programming is an art of precision.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/24/2007 2:56:32 PM
comp.lang.java.programmer 52714 articles. 1 followers. Post Follow

91 Replies
867 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 16

Lew wrote :> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  > The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>Well I tried that, but the compiler threw a fit:public function boolean it'sOn(){  return true;}> Programming is an art of precision.You obviously do not read http://worsethanfailure.com-- Wojtek :-)
0
Wojtek
10/24/2007 2:59:28 PM
In article <Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com>,Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The >word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>Programming is an art of precision.But surely you cannot actually use the apostrophe in symbol names, soyou will have to abbreviate both to "its" anyway when used in code?Cheers,	Bent D-- Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd                                    powered by emacs
0
bcd
10/24/2007 3:01:17 PM
Lew wrote :>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral >> genitive.  The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".Wojtek wrote:> Well I tried that, but the compiler threw a fit:> > public function boolean it'sOn()> {>  return true;> }Did you miss the part that said, "[i]n English"?>> Programming is an art of precision.> You obviously do not read http://worsethanfailure.comNo, I do not.  What is the relevance?-- Lew
0
Lew
10/24/2007 3:03:20 PM
Bent C Dalager wrote:> In article <Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com>,> Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The >> word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>> Programming is an art of precision.> > But surely you cannot actually use the apostrophe in symbol names, so> you will have to abbreviate both to "its" anyway when used in code?Did you miss the part that said, "[i]n English"?-- Lew
0
Lew
10/24/2007 3:03:43 PM
In article <Jq6dna3vwKBSw4LanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com>,Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>Bent C Dalager wrote:>> In article <Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com>,>> Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The >>> word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>> >> But surely you cannot actually use the apostrophe in symbol names, so>> you will have to abbreviate both to "its" anyway when used in code?>>Did you miss the part that said, "[i]n English"?I wonder - did you miss the part that said "Programming . . ." ? :-)Cheers	Bent D-- Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd                                    powered by emacs
0
bcd
10/24/2007 3:39:33 PM
Lew wrote :>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>> You obviously do not read http://worsethanfailure.com>> No, I do not.  What is the relevance?Have a look at the site. It will become clear.-- Wojtek :-)
0
Wojtek
10/24/2007 4:27:45 PM
On 24.10.2007 17:39, Bent C Dalager wrote:> In article <Jq6dna3vwKBSw4LanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com>,> Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>> Bent C Dalager wrote:>>> In article <Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com>,>>> Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>>>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The >>>> word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>>>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>> But surely you cannot actually use the apostrophe in symbol names, so>>> you will have to abbreviate both to "its" anyway when used in code?>> Did you miss the part that said, "[i]n English"?> > I wonder - did you miss the part that said "Programming . . ." ? :-)Lew did not make a remark about programming but about English language.	robert
0
Robert
10/24/2007 8:57:36 PM
In article <5o9pu1Flra29U1@mid.individual.net>,Robert Klemme  <shortcutter@googlemail.com> wrote:>On 24.10.2007 17:39, Bent C Dalager wrote:>> In article <Jq6dna3vwKBSw4LanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com>,>> Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>>> Bent C Dalager wrote:>>>> In article <Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com>,>>>> Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>>>>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The >>>>> word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>>>>>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>>> But surely you cannot actually use the apostrophe in symbol names, so>>>> you will have to abbreviate both to "its" anyway when used in code?>>> Did you miss the part that said, "[i]n English"?>> >> I wonder - did you miss the part that said "Programming . . ." ? :-)>>Lew did not make a remark about programming but about English language.Ah, but he /did/ make a remark about programming. The entirety of theoriginal post is reproduced above, making this quite clear.If you want to present a case that his second paragraph should not beunderstood in connection with his first paragraph, well, then youactually need to do so :-)Cheers,	Bent D-- Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd                                    powered by emacs
0
bcd
10/24/2007 9:10:27 PM
Lew wrote:> Lew wrote :> Wojtek wrote:>> public function boolean it'sOn()>> {>>  return true;>> }> > Did you miss the part that said, "[i]n English"?> Also, the convention for Boolean checkers is something like:public function boolean isOn(){     return true;}or isItOn(), if you must./W
0
Wildemar
10/24/2007 10:42:32 PM
On Oct 24, 10:56 am, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The> word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>> Programming is an art of precision.>Xah Lew
0
cpa88901
10/24/2007 11:15:04 PM
Wildemar Wildenburger said something like:> Lew wrote:>> Lew wrote :>> Wojtek wrote:>>> public function boolean it'sOn()>>> {>>>  return true;>>> }>>>> Did you miss the part that said, "[i]n English"?>>>> Also, the convention for Boolean checkers is something like:>> public function boolean isOn()> {>     return true;> }>> or isItOn(), if you must.>> /WI once was part of a large-ish project where the #defines were often negative ascertions in english.  Big mistake.The one that made me hit something was "NO_PARAM_TYPES" and the following usage:#ifndef NO_PARAM_TYPES    // something obtuse#else    // ARRRRRRRR WTF GOES HERE?????????#endif
0
Thomas
10/24/2007 11:17:07 PM
Wojtek wrote:> Lew wrote :>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>>>> You obviously do not read http://worsethanfailure.com>>>> No, I do not.  What is the relevance?> > Have a look at the site. It will become clear.I did, and it didn't.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 12:52:27 AM
Bent C Dalager wrote:> If you want to present a case that his second paragraph should not be> understood in connection with his first paragraph, well, then you> actually need to do so :-)My point was that precision is important to programming, not that "its" or "it's" belongs in a program.Carelessness in small matters, like "its" vs. "it's", is not a good habit of mind for programmers.  Attention to detail is.  Not every detail is a programming detail, but the exercise of the mind carries over.You must have realized that and are just being inflammatory.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 12:54:28 AM
Lew wrote:>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The>> word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>> Programming is an art of precision.cpa88901@gmail.com wrote:> Xah LewHey, that is funny!  Good one.Wouldn't I have to have blathered on for another 3000 words, repeating an article I wrote ten years ago, for that to apply fully?Nevertheless, it gave me a chuckle.  Thanks.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 12:56:26 AM
On Oct 24, 8:54 pm, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:> Bent C Dalager wrote:> > If you want to present a case that his second paragraph should not be> > understood in connection with his first paragraph, well, then you> > actually need to do so :-)>> My point was that precision is important to programming, not that "its" or> "it's" belongs in a program.>> Carelessness in small matters, like "its" vs. "it's", is not a good habit of> mind for programmers.  Attention to detail is.  Not every detail is a> programming detail, but the exercise of the mind carries over.>> You must have realized that and are just being inflammatory.>> --> Lewtakes a twisted turn
0
cpa88901
10/25/2007 1:09:37 AM
"Lew" <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote in message news:Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com...> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive. > The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>> Programming is an art of precision.>> -- > LewI also see There, Their, and They're all misused to all extremes.THERE is a newsgroup named c.l.j.p, and THEY'RE always trying to keep THEIR group on topic.(Escept with this thread.);-)
0
Hal
10/25/2007 1:23:42 AM
Wojtek wrote:> Lew wrote :>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>>>> You obviously do not read http://worsethanfailure.com>>>> No, I do not.  What is the relevance?> > Have a look at the site. It will become clear.> I read it daily.  Even linked to it from my blogroll :-)-- Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
0
Daniel
10/25/2007 2:00:17 AM
Hal Rosser wrote:> "Lew" <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote in message > news:Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com...>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive. >> The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>>> -- >> Lew> > I also see There, Their, and They're all misused to all extremes.> THERE is a newsgroup named c.l.j.p, and THEY'RE always trying to keep THEIR > group on topic.> (Escept with this thread.)> ;-)> > > Thats okay, the subject's marked [OT] :-)-- Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
0
Daniel
10/25/2007 2:03:24 AM
Hal Rosser said something like:> "Lew" <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote in message> news:Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com...>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral>> genitive. The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>>> -->> Lew>> I also see There, Their, and They're all misused to all extremes.> THERE is a newsgroup named c.l.j.p, and THEY'RE always trying to keep> THEIR group on topic.> (Escept with this thread.)> ;-)Bah.  My english gripe involves the mispronounciation of Realtor and Realty. It's reel-tor and reel-tee people, not reel-i-tor and reel-i-tee. 
0
Thomas
10/25/2007 2:33:34 AM
Lew wrote:> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The > word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".> > Programming is an art of precision.> > The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.-- Sabine Dinis BlochbergerOp3racionalwww.op3racional.eu
0
Sabine
10/25/2007 8:45:36 AM
Thomas G. Marshall wrote:> Hal Rosser said something like:>> "Lew" <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote in message>> news:Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com...>>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral>>> genitive. The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>>>>> -->>> Lew>>>> I also see There, Their, and They're all misused to all extremes.>> THERE is a newsgroup named c.l.j.p, and THEY'RE always trying to keep>> THEIR group on topic.>> (Escept with this thread.)>> ;-)> > > Bah.  My english gripe involves the mispronounciation of Realtor and Realty. > It's reel-tor and reel-tee people, not reel-i-tor and reel-i-tee.My English gripe is Americans claiming they speak English. The word realtordoesn't exist in English. There is the word reality, which has no meaning to anestate agent ;-)-- Nigel Wade, System Administrator, Space Plasma Physics Group,            University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK E-mail :    nmw@ion.le.ac.uk Phone :     +44 (0)116 2523548, Fax : +44 (0)116 2523555
0
Nigel
10/25/2007 9:34:01 AM
In article <OoGdnbfCkO3ZdILanZ2dnUVZ_oDinZ2d@comcast.com>,Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>>My point was that precision is important to programming, not that "its" or >"it's" belongs in a program.>>Carelessness in small matters, like "its" vs. "it's", is not a good habit of >mind for programmers.  Attention to detail is.  Not every detail is a >programming detail, but the exercise of the mind carries over.But then again, thinking outside the box and throwing conservatism tothe winds (so to speak) can be equally useful. Chances are that withina few decades, "its" will have both the meanings of today's "its" and"it's" anyway, so why fret the issue? Let the young'uns define theirown culture and don't be a sourpuss that they change some of thethings that you had gotten used to. Yes, I too cringe a bit when I see"it's" being used for "its". But the fact is, language evolves overtime. This is a good thing - even if it does cause some local vexationevery now and then.>You must have realized that and are just being inflammatory.Well, I do recognize pedantry hour when it comes on, and I canpedanticate with the best of them! :-)Cheers,	Bent D-- Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd                                    powered by emacs
0
bcd
10/25/2007 9:43:26 AM
In article <2gTTi.3092$aB2.1816@trndny07>,Thomas G. Marshall <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote:>>Bah.  My english gripe involves the mispronounciation of Realtor and Realty. >It's reel-tor and reel-tee people, not reel-i-tor and reel-i-tee. I always wondered a bit about all the people who seem to think thatsaying "nukular" in public should be a hanging offense - are"tolerance of dialects" and "respect for other people's culture"purely Norwegian concepts?Cheers,	Bent D-- Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd                                    powered by emacs
0
bcd
10/25/2007 9:48:40 AM
Nigel Wade wrote:> My English gripe is Americans claiming they speak English. The word realtor> doesn't exist in English. There is the word reality, which has no meaning to an> estate agent ;-)It's "Realtor", a proper noun, and it's a registered trademark, so, yes, it exists in English, every dialect.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 1:07:57 PM
Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:> The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.Also "persons".> 2 plural : human beings, persons > —often used in compounds instead of persons <salespeople> <http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/people>-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 1:12:05 PM
Lew, 24.10.2007 16:56:> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral > genitive.  The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".I find it even more irritating if the plural is constructed using an apostrophe, like e.g. "a lot of table's" or "the BLOB's are stored in.."
0
Thomas
10/25/2007 1:19:44 PM
Lew wrote:> Nigel Wade wrote:>> My English gripe is Americans claiming they speak English. The word realtor>> doesn't exist in English. There is the word reality, which has no meaning toan>> estate agent ;-)> > It's "Realtor", a proper noun, and it's a registered trademark, so, yes, it > exists in English, every dialect.> A registered trade mark is not a word.-- Nigel Wade, System Administrator, Space Plasma Physics Group,            University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK E-mail :    nmw@ion.le.ac.uk Phone :     +44 (0)116 2523548, Fax : +44 (0)116 2523555
0
Nigel
10/25/2007 1:26:15 PM
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 15:19:44 +0200, Thomas Kellerer wrote:> I find it even more irritating if the plural is constructed using an> apostrophe, like e.g. "a lot of table's" or "the BLOB's are stored> in.."Some plurals require it:  Cross your t's and dot your i's.  The no's have it."your welcome"(my what?)/gordon--
0
Gordon
10/25/2007 1:27:38 PM
Nigel Wade wrote:> A registered trade mark is not a word.O-o-o-Kaaay.>   'I don't know what you mean by "glory,"' Alice said.> >   Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously.  'Of course you don't--> till I tell you.  I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for> you!"'> >   'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument,"' Alice> objected.> >   'When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful> tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor> less.'-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 1:41:33 PM
Lew wrote:> Nigel Wade wrote:>> A registered trade mark is not a word.> > O-o-o-Kaaay.> >>   'I don't know what you mean by "glory,"' Alice said.>>>>   Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously.  'Of course you don't-->> till I tell you.  I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for>> you!"'>>>>   'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument,"' Alice>> objected.>>>>   'When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful>> tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor>> less.'You might want to take a look at<http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/word>-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 1:50:48 PM
Nigel Wade said something like:> Thomas G. Marshall wrote:>>> Hal Rosser said something like:>>> "Lew" <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote in message>>> news:Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com...>>>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral>>>> genitive. The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>>>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>>>>>>> -->>>> Lew>>>>>> I also see There, Their, and They're all misused to all extremes.>>> THERE is a newsgroup named c.l.j.p, and THEY'RE always trying to>>> keep THEIR group on topic.>>> (Escept with this thread.)>>> ;-)>>>>>> Bah.  My english gripe involves the mispronounciation of Realtor and>> Realty. It's reel-tor and reel-tee people, not reel-i-tor and>> reel-i-tee.>> My English gripe is Americans claiming they speak English. The word> realtor doesn't exist in English. There is the word reality, which> has no meaning to an estate agent ;-)Fine, :) confine my comments to /realty/ then. http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/realtyHowever, and this bugs me, apparently according to MW, reel-eh-tee is now listed, though behind a division symbol, whatever that means.  My MW (book) does not have that, so it must be a common usage thing.Oh well.  Such things happen.  I'll continue to gripe about /realty/ :)Though, I still am a little peaved that "orientate" seems to have lost its "usually considered substandard" attribute, but I noticed that about 15 years ago or so, so this is a long peave... :)
0
Thomas
10/25/2007 2:35:54 PM
Thomas G. Marshall said something like:....[rip]...> However, and this bugs me, apparently according to MW, reel-eh-tee isStrike that.   I got that one confused with Realtor.  Too much caffeine already this morning.......[rip]... 
0
Thomas
10/25/2007 2:38:14 PM
Bent C Dalager said something like:> In article <2gTTi.3092$aB2.1816@trndny07>,> Thomas G. Marshall> <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote:>>>> Bah.  My english gripe involves the mispronounciation of Realtor and>> Realty. It's reel-tor and reel-tee people, not reel-i-tor and>> reel-i-tee.>> I always wondered a bit about all the people who seem to think that> saying "nukular" in public should be a hanging offense - are> "tolerance of dialects" and "respect for other people's culture"> purely Norwegian concepts?I'm half norwegian.  So perhaps that's why I advocate caning for such mistakes, not hanging.Though, {author cringes}, I try and try to not say nukular and it is nearly impossible.  The best I can do is to stop before I say it and force out the noo-clee-ar, or correct myself after the fact. 
0
Thomas
10/25/2007 2:40:53 PM
Lew wrote :> Lew wrote :>>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  >>> The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>> Wojtek wrote:>> Well I tried that, but the compiler threw a fit:>> >> public function boolean it'sOn()>> {>>  return true;>> }>> Did you miss the part that said, "[i]n English"?No, I did not. But I WAS trying to be funny. Obviously to you it was not funny.I know of NO language that allows punctuation within variable names or key words.Lew, we have had this sort of encounter before, where I make a joke and it is not funny to you, where you take it literally. I will endeavour not to try to amuse you in the future.-- Wojtek :-)
0
Wojtek
10/25/2007 3:02:50 PM
Thomas G. Marshall wrote :> Bah.  My english gripe involves the mispronounciation of Realtor and Realty. > It's reel-tor and reel-tee people, not reel-i-tor and reel-i-tee.Radio announcers saying "Ave", or "Veg", or generally mangling the language.There should be a broadcasting law which FORCES people to use proper grammar. Especially advertisers, who seem to think that making up "cutsy" words sells their products.-- Wojtek :-)
0
Wojtek
10/25/2007 3:07:37 PM
Wojtek wrote:> Lew, we have had this sort of encounter before, where I make a joke and > it is not funny to you, where you take it literally. I will endeavour > not to try to amuse you in the future.Um, oops.  Sorry.Please do keep trying to amuse me.  I will factor in the humor factor in future.  I am a fan, Wojtek.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 3:10:01 PM
Bent C Dalager wrote:> I always wondered a bit about all the people who seem to think that> saying "nukular" in public should be a hanging offense - are> "tolerance of dialects" and "respect for other people's culture"> purely Norwegian concepts?> Aren't those more like Norwegian necessities? ;)Seriously though, "nukular" stems from "nucleus" so I'm all for retaining that connection. At least when you actually talk about stuff concerning the nuclei of atoms.I can however stomach the word "nukular" in non-scientific contexts relating to radioactivity (by a detour via the "verb" "to nuke"), because there no conceptual connection to a nucleus is needed./W
0
Wildemar
10/25/2007 3:11:05 PM
In article <mn.c9e27d7a3e33b644.70216@a.com>, Wojtek  <nowhere@a.com> wrote:>>I know of NO language that allows punctuation within variable names or >key words.OpenOffice Basic apparantly supports whitespace in variable names, ifyou enclose the whole thing in square brackets: Dim [i have whitespace] As IntegerYou now have an integer variable called "i have whitespace".Also, since Java supports Unicode symbol names, it may be possible tofind some valid Unicode symbols that at least /look like/ they arepunctuation :-)Cheers,	Bent D-- Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd                                    powered by emacs
0
bcd
10/25/2007 3:14:10 PM
Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:> The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.Yeah, that's what I was told in English class as well. ;)However "people" is just a "conceptual" plural, used when the identities of individual members of the group don't play a role and you refer to the group rather than its members.I guess/W
0
Wildemar
10/25/2007 3:16:37 PM
Thomas Kellerer wrote:> I find it even more irritating if the plural is constructed using an > apostrophe, like e.g. "a lot of table's" or "the BLOB's are stored in.."> I find that this is mostly done by Germans, as (I suppose) they are used to adding "'s" to a word in order to from the genitive./W
0
Wildemar
10/25/2007 3:19:25 PM
On Oct 24, 10:56 am, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The> word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".OH MY GOD!Thanks Lew for showing me that I am not the only one who is annoyed bythis. I'm surrounded by overpaid "senior developers" who can't grasp asimple concept like "it's" vs. "its" and the other related ones."Loose" vs. "Lose" is another one that makes me crazy.Granted we weren't English majors, but a basic grasp of the languageis necessary in any profession.--Joe
0
Joe
10/25/2007 4:34:42 PM
Bent C Dalager wrote :> In article <mn.c9e27d7a3e33b644.70216@a.com>, Wojtek  <nowhere@a.com> wrote:>> >> I know of NO language that allows punctuation within variable names or >> key words.>> OpenOffice Basic apparantly supports whitespace in variable names, if> you enclose the whole thing in square brackets: >> Dim [i have whitespace] As Integer>> You now have an integer variable called "i have whitespace".Yikes! Shades of whitespacein OS file names.> Also, since Java supports Unicode symbol names, it may be possible to> find some valid Unicode symbols that at least /look like/ they are> punctuation :-)Oh great...Then your code looks like compressed JavaScript, or Perl, or some other non-maintainable mess-- Wojtek :-)
0
Wojtek
10/25/2007 5:37:45 PM
Joe Attardi wrote :> "Loose" vs. "Lose" is another one that makes me crazy.Rotsky, is that you?Um, somewhat (maybe) obscure reference to an incident on Fark ...-- Wojtek :-)
0
Wojtek
10/25/2007 5:40:06 PM
On Oct 25, 1:40 pm, Wojtek <nowh...@a.com> wrote:> Rotsky, is that you?Sorry, pet peeve.:-)/long time lurker on Fark, never have commented though
0
Joe
10/25/2007 7:31:43 PM
Wildemar Wildenburger wrote on 25.10.2007 17:19:> Thomas Kellerer wrote:>> I find it even more irritating if the plural is constructed using an >> apostrophe, like e.g. "a lot of table's" or "the BLOB's are stored in..">>> I find that this is mostly done by Germans, as (I suppose) they are used > to adding "'s" to a word in order to from the genitive.Which is completely wrong in German as well. In German the ' may only be used to mark characters that have been left out (similar to it's == it is)Thomas
0
Thomas
10/25/2007 7:42:14 PM
Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:> I can however stomach the word "nukular" in non-scientific contexts > relating to radioactivity (by a detour via the "verb" "to nuke"), > because there no conceptual connection to a nucleus is needed.Other than the conceptual link to the atomic nuclei that are fissioning, of course.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 8:05:52 PM
Lew wrote:> Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:>> I can however stomach the word "nukular" in non-scientific contexts >> relating to radioactivity (by a detour via the "verb" "to nuke"), >> because there no conceptual connection to a nucleus is needed.> > Other than the conceptual link to the atomic nuclei that are fissioning, > of course.> OK, again someone wasn't precise enough for his Lewness. I meant that you can conceivably *abstact* from nuclei in that case, since when you talk about an A-Bomb or a NPP blowing up and killing millions of people, most folks will believe you without ever thinking of atomic nuclei.And Lew, I know that you understood what I was getting at. You just *needed* to pick nits, right?/W
0
Wildemar
10/25/2007 8:51:34 PM
Thomas Kellerer wrote:> > > Wildemar Wildenburger wrote on 25.10.2007 17:19:>> Thomas Kellerer wrote:>>> I find it even more irritating if the plural is constructed using an >>> apostrophe, like e.g. "a lot of table's" or "the BLOB's are stored in..">>>>> I find that this is mostly done by Germans, as (I suppose) they are >> used to adding "'s" to a word in order to from the genitive.> > Which is completely wrong in German as well. In German the ' may only be > used to mark characters that have been left out (similar to it's == it is)> Boy is my face red.Note to self: Think, check, then check again. Then post./W
0
Wildemar
10/25/2007 8:53:54 PM
Lew wrote:> Wojtek wrote:>> Lew wrote :>>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>>>>>> You obviously do not read http://worsethanfailure.com>>>>>> No, I do not.  What is the relevance?>>>> Have a look at the site. It will become clear.> > I did, and it didn't.> The site provides several examples of programming code that make you want to gouge your eyes out at times. I believe it is these examples of crappy programming code to which Wojtek was referring.-- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
0
Joshua
10/25/2007 9:04:37 PM
Wojtek wrote:>> Also, since Java supports Unicode symbol names, it may be possible to>> find some valid Unicode symbols that at least /look like/ they are>> punctuation :-)> > Oh great...> > Then your code looks like compressed JavaScript, or Perl, or some other > non-maintainable mess> Want a non-maintainable mess? Replace every character with its \uXXXX equivalent (since Unicode escapes are the first things processed). Then watch IDEs die on the input because they don't realize how early they're processed.For bonus points, use \uuXXXX :-)-- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
0
Joshua
10/25/2007 9:07:44 PM
Bent C Dalager wrote:> In article <2gTTi.3092$aB2.1816@trndny07>,> Thomas G. Marshall <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote:>> Bah.  My english gripe involves the mispronounciation of Realtor and Realty. >> It's reel-tor and reel-tee people, not reel-i-tor and reel-i-tee. > > I always wondered a bit about all the people who seem to think that> saying "nukular" in public should be a hanging offense - are> "tolerance of dialects" and "respect for other people's culture"> purely Norwegian concepts?Well, to a degree, it depends on the setting. Speaking in a slangy sort of way or other generally poor accent would be inappropriate in a high-class environment. It also depends on the strength of the accent and the words: "nukular" is indisputably going to refer to "nuclear", so there's no real danger of misunderstanding, whereas in French, "sous" and "sus" ("under"/"over", for non-French speakers out there) sound very similar and have antonyms as possible words that a strong accent can be problematic. Since my pronunciation in French ranges from "blegh" to mediocre, I tend to agree with the idea of tolerance of dialects.While on the topic, I want to relate this story of my sister's French teacher:On back to school night, she heavily emphasized that it is important to "learn to speak without an accent" because "it is very insulting to a culture to speak with an accent." As you can guess, she was doing this in a very thick accent. How thick? It took me five minutes to register that she was speaking English and not French...In general, my only umbrage with accents and dialects is when they impede comprehension.-- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
0
Joshua
10/25/2007 9:21:40 PM
Joshua Cranmer wrote :> Wojtek wrote:>>> Also, since Java supports Unicode symbol names, it may be possible to>>> find some valid Unicode symbols that at least /look like/ they are>>> punctuation :-)>> >> Oh great...>> >> Then your code looks like compressed JavaScript, or Perl, or some other >> non-maintainable mess>> > Want a non-maintainable mess? Replace every character with its \uXXXX > equivalent (since Unicode escapes are the first things processed). Then watch > IDEs die on the input because they don't realize how early they're processed.>> For bonus points, use \uuXXXX :-)The worst was running C on an IBM main-frame. Because there are (were?) no curly braces and other non-text characters you had to use tri-graph sequences.I ended up developing on a PC, then running ALL the code through a filter which did the replacements. Oh yes, all variables and functions were limited to non-case sensitive 8 characters, so that had to be replaced also.My head hurts just thinking about it ...-- Wojtek :-)
0
Wojtek
10/25/2007 10:03:47 PM
Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:> And Lew, I know that you understood what I was getting at. You just > *needed* to pick nits, right?That's right.  :-)Honestly, I get the biggest chuckle when you guys hold a mirror up in my face and I see how ridiculous I look.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 10:09:31 PM
Lew wrote:> Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:>> And Lew, I know that you understood what I was getting at. You just >> *needed* to pick nits, right?> > That's right.  :-)> > Honestly, I get the biggest chuckle when you guys hold a mirror up in my > face and I see how ridiculous I look.But the shoe is on the other foot.  This time I was trying to be humorous by pointing out the connection between radiation and nuclei.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/25/2007 10:14:46 PM
Nigel Wade wrote:> Thomas G. Marshall wrote:> >> Hal Rosser said something like:>>> "Lew" <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote in message>>> news:Jq6dnbPvwKC8wILanZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@comcast.com...>>>> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral>>>> genitive. The word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>>>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>>>>>>> -->>>> Lew>>> I also see There, Their, and They're all misused to all extremes.>>> THERE is a newsgroup named c.l.j.p, and THEY'RE always trying to keep>>> THEIR group on topic.>>> (Escept with this thread.)>>> ;-)>>>> Bah.  My english gripe involves the mispronounciation of Realtor and Realty. >> It's reel-tor and reel-tee people, not reel-i-tor and reel-i-tee.> > My English gripe is Americans claiming they speak English. The word realtor> doesn't exist in English.It (sc. "Realtor" -- note capitalization) is a trademark for an association of estate agents who at least claim to have higher ethical standards than the common herd of estate agents. Since that association has not crossed the ocean, it is not surprising that the word has not, either.But I confess that I was vaguely surprised that you did not jump on "reel-tor"; only a few generations ago, "reel" for "real" was regarded as vulgar in England.-- John W. Kennedy"I want everybody to be smart. As smart as they can be. A world of ignorant people is too dangerous to live in."   -- Garson Kanin. "Born Yesterday"
0
John
10/26/2007 2:19:43 AM
Bent C Dalager wrote:> In article <2gTTi.3092$aB2.1816@trndny07>,> Thomas G. Marshall <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote:>> Bah.  My english gripe involves the mispronounciation of Realtor and Realty. >> It's reel-tor and reel-tee people, not reel-i-tor and reel-i-tee. > I always wondered a bit about all the people who seem to think that> saying "nukular" in public should be a hanging offense - are> "tolerance of dialects" and "respect for other people's culture"> purely Norwegian concepts?Norway and Greece have unusual histories in that respect.-- John W. Kennedy"Give up vows and dogmas, and fixed things, and you may grow like That. ....you may come to think a blow bad, because it hurts, and not because it humiliates.  You may come to think murder wrong, because it is violent, and not because it is unjust."   -- G. K. Chesterton.  "The Ball and the Cross"
0
John
10/26/2007 2:50:14 AM
Wojtek wrote :> The worst was running C on an IBM main-frame. Because there are (were?) no > curly braces and other non-text characters you had to use tri-graph > sequences.Ok, it was not curly braces, but rather [ ] ~ and ^. Forgive me, it was back in 1990...[ - ??(] - ??)~ - ??\^ - ??-So a two dimensional array in C might look like:  abc[idx1][idx2]but with tri-graphs would look like:  abc??(idx1??)??(idx2??)Or if you nested arrays:  abc[zxc[idx1]]  abc??(zxc??(idx1??)??)Also tabs needed to be replaced with spaces, and looking at the code, I tried to keep indentation alignment.fun stuff...-- Wojtek :-)
0
Wojtek
10/26/2007 3:15:46 PM
In article <mn.cb877d7aa092a63f.70216@a.com>, Wojtek  <nowhere@a.com> wrote:>>The worst was running C on an IBM main-frame. Because there are (were?) Are. In fact, the following code is a semi-famous use of trigraphs towrite code that is difficult to read (I use C++ here for its "//"comments):#include <stdio.h>int main(){   printf("First line\n"); // WHAT is going on here ??/   printf("Stealth line\n");}When compiled and run, the output of the above is justFirst linewhen most people would expectFirst lineStealth lineThis is because the ??/ trigraph expands to the backslash very earlyon, and the backslash causes the next line to the appended to thecurrent line. The second printf is therefore part of the comment onthe first line.Fun and games all around :-)(It varies a bit however as to whether trigraphs default to beingenabled or not in different compilers. When I compile the above codewith Sun C++ 5.8, the trigraph is substituted. When I compile it withgcc 2.95.4, I need to add the "-trigraphs" option for the same tohappen - gcc defaults to having both lines of text printed.)Cheers,	Bent D.-- Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd                                    powered by emacs
0
bcd
10/26/2007 4:06:59 PM
Wojtek wrote:> Wojtek wrote :>> The worst was running C on an IBM main-frame. Because there are >> (were?) no curly braces and other non-text characters you had to use >> tri-graph sequences.> > Ok, it was not curly braces, but rather [ ] ~ and ^. Forgive me, it was > back in 1990...> > [ - ??(> ] - ??)> ~ - ??\> ^ - ??-> > So a two dimensional array in C might look like:> >  abc[idx1][idx2]> > but with tri-graphs would look like:> >  abc??(idx1??)??(idx2??)> > Or if you nested arrays:> >  abc[zxc[idx1]]> >  abc??(zxc??(idx1??)??)> > Also tabs needed to be replaced with spaces, and looking at the code, I > tried to keep indentation alignment.> > fun stuff...> Tabs are generally frowned upon anyway. Of course, back then they probably weren't as counter-productive.  Different text handlers tend to have so many different inconsistent handling of tabs. Not just in tab length, but in other characteristics, such as whether it is always N spaces wide, or takes you to the next tab mark.Not that this has anything to do with this already off-topic thread :-)-- Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
0
Daniel
10/26/2007 4:59:45 PM
Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:> Lew wrote:> >> In English, the word "its" is the third-person singular neutral genitive.  The >> word "it's" is a contraction for "it is".>>>> Programming is an art of precision.>>>>> The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.No, the plural of "person" is "persons". But "people" is often used as a substitute, despite the fact that "people" has its own plural: "peoples".-- John W. Kennedy"Compact is becoming contract,Man only earns and pays."   -- Charles Williams.  "Bors to Elayne:  On the King's Coins"
0
John
10/26/2007 5:33:26 PM
Bent C Dalager wrote :> In article <mn.cb877d7aa092a63f.70216@a.com>, Wojtek  <nowhere@a.com> wrote:>> >> The worst was running C on an IBM main-frame. Because there are (were?) >> Are. In fact, the following code is a semi-famous use of trigraphs to> write code that is difficult to read (I use C++ here for its "//"> comments):>> #include <stdio.h>> int main()> {>    printf("First line\n"); // WHAT is going on here ??/>    printf("Stealth line\n");> }What a wonderful way to hide functionality. You could write the first method to do something, and the second to undo what the first does, yet the second does not get executed.Yes, yes I know....I worked in IT security for a while, and you get this mindset to always look for how something could get subverted.-- Wojtek :-)
0
Wojtek
10/26/2007 5:49:48 PM
Bent C Dalager wrote :>> #include <stdio.h>>> int main()>> {>>    printf("First line\n"); // WHAT is going on here ??/>>    printf("Stealth line\n");>> }Wojtek wrote:> What a wonderful way to hide functionality. You could write the first > method to do something, and the second to undo what the first does, yet > the second does not get executed.A similar matter pertains to Unicode escapes in Java source, which are converted prior to lexical parsing.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/26/2007 6:54:15 PM
Bent C Dalager wrote:> In article <mn.cb877d7aa092a63f.70216@a.com>, Wojtek  <nowhere@a.com> wrote:>> The worst was running C on an IBM main-frame. Because there are (were?) > > Are. In fact, the following code is a semi-famous use of trigraphs to> write code that is difficult to read (I use C++ here for its "//"> comments):> > #include <stdio.h>> int main()> {>    printf("First line\n"); // WHAT is going on here ??/>    printf("Stealth line\n");> }> > When compiled and run, the output of the above is just> > First line> > when most people would expect> > First line> Stealth line> > This is because the ??/ trigraph expands to the backslash very early> on, and the backslash causes the next line to the appended to the> current line. The second printf is therefore part of the comment on> the first line.> > Fun and games all around :-)> > (It varies a bit however as to whether trigraphs default to being> enabled or not in different compilers. When I compile the above code> with Sun C++ 5.8, the trigraph is substituted. When I compile it with> gcc 2.95.4, I need to add the "-trigraphs" option for the same to> happen - gcc defaults to having both lines of text printed.)> > Cheers,> 	Bent D.One more reason to have proper grammar and punctuation in comments.  If the comment only had the appropriate number of question marks, this couldn't have happened.-- Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
0
Daniel
10/26/2007 7:05:32 PM
Wojtek wrote:> Bent C Dalager wrote :>> In article <mn.cb877d7aa092a63f.70216@a.com>, Wojtek  <nowhere@a.com> >> wrote:>>>>>> The worst was running C on an IBM main-frame. Because there are (were?) >>>> Are. In fact, the following code is a semi-famous use of trigraphs to>> write code that is difficult to read (I use C++ here for its "//">> comments):>>>> #include <stdio.h>>> int main()>> {>>    printf("First line\n"); // WHAT is going on here ??/>>    printf("Stealth line\n");>> }> > What a wonderful way to hide functionality. You could write the first > method to do something, and the second to undo what the first does, yet > the second does not get executed.> > Yes, yes I know....> > I worked in IT security for a while, and you get this mindset to always > look for how something could get subverted.> Actually, I think the other way would be more useful.Have an "return if security fails" be commented out in the less-than-obvious way, and the NEXT line does something privileged.-- Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
0
Daniel
10/26/2007 7:08:00 PM
Daniel Pitts wrote :> One more reason to have proper grammar and punctuation in comments.  If the > comment only had the appropriate number of question marks, this couldn't have > happened.LOL-- Wojtek :-)
0
Wojtek
10/26/2007 7:45:51 PM
On Oct 24, 9:09 pm, cpa88...@gmail.com wrote:> takes a twisted turnIs this meant to be some sort of an insult directed against me?It better not be.
0
nebulous99
10/26/2007 11:38:43 PM
nebulous99@gmail.com wrote:> On Oct 24, 9:09 pm, cpa88...@gmail.com wrote:>> takes a twisted turn> > Is this meant to be some sort of an insult directed against me?> > It better not be.> See what I mean about perceived threats?Imagine this scenario... Two people have business to conduct at a police station.  One thinks that everyone with a gun is threatening him, so he brings his own weapon to "defend" himself.  The other guy doesn't really care... Guess what? The first guy *causes* his own fear to come true.Less people would "flame" you if you didn't accuse so many people of flamming you.-- Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
0
Daniel
10/27/2007 1:26:45 AM
nebulous99@gmail.com wrote:> On Oct 24, 9:09 pm, cpa88...@gmail.com wrote:>> takes a twisted turn> > Is this meant to be some sort of an insult directed against me?> > It better not be.Or you will make a fool out of yourself in yet another thread ?Arne
0
ISO
10/27/2007 2:33:39 AM
Arne Vajhøj wrote:> nebulous99@gmail.com wrote:>> On Oct 24, 9:09 pm, cpa88...@gmail.com wrote:>>> takes a twisted turn>>>> Is this meant to be some sort of an insult directed against me?>>>> It better not be.> > Or you will make a fool out of yourself in yet another thread ?Perhaps it was actually a reference to the Crowther and Woods /Adventure/ game, in which there are several rooms described only as, "You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike."  The implication I took was that I was taking myself far too seriously and getting lost in the maze of self-importance.  There are also trolls in that game, so another reading I took from the comment was that I should avoid being trollish.It might have been called criticism, or a warning, but I see it as well-intentioned, a metaphor advising me to participate in a gentle and friendly way for my benefit, but more importantly, to empower all the participants in this group.  No matter; my reputation is not important as long as we are learning the ways of Java and how to make ourselves comfortable exploiting our skills therein.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/27/2007 2:59:04 AM
On Oct 26, 10:33 pm, Arne Vajh=F8j <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:> nebulou...@gmail.com wrote:> > On Oct 24, 9:09 pm, cpa88...@gmail.com wrote:> >> takes a twisted turn>> > Is this meant to be some sort of an insult directed against me?>> > It better not be.>> Or [lie and insult deleted]?Fuck you.
0
nebulous99
10/28/2007 11:35:18 PM
On Oct 26, 10:59 pm, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:[snip undesirable repetition of Arne's nasty lying insult]> It might have been called criticism, or a warning, but I see it as> well-intentioned, a metaphor advising me to participate in a gentle and> friendly way for my benefit, but more importantly, to empower all the> participants in this group.And you, Arne, Mike Schilling, Owen, and several other people I couldname could definitely use more such advice.
0
nebulous99
10/28/2007 11:36:50 PM
On Oct 26, 9:26 pm, Daniel Pitts<newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:> See what I mean about perceived threats?No. You are not going to succeed in tricking me into letting down myguard.> Imagine this scenario... Two people have business to conduct at a police> station.  One thinks that everyone with a gun is threatening him, so he> brings his own weapon to "defend" himself.  The other guy doesn't really> care... Guess what? The first guy *causes* his own fear to come true.If you think this analogy at all appropriate then you're even moredeluded than I'd feared. This newsgroup is in no way comparable to apolice station, and my attackers to police officers granted somespecial authority over me. This newsgroup seems much better comparedto a battlefield, and on a battlefield you are well advised to a) comearmed and b) react quickly and decisively to anything that looks likesomeone drawing a weapon and aiming it in your general direction. Themore so if they seem to be wearing the other side's uniform, but evenif not.> Less people would "flame" you if you didn't accuse so many people of> flamming [sic] you.Your attention to detail, such as spelling and grammar, certainlyhelps to make your case more credible. Eheh heh heh.
0
nebulous99
10/28/2007 11:40:21 PM
nebulous99@gmail.com wrote:> On Oct 26, 10:33 pm, Arne Vajh�j <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:>> nebulou...@gmail.com wrote:>>> On Oct 24, 9:09 pm, cpa88...@gmail.com wrote:>>>> takes a twisted turn>>> Is this meant to be some sort of an insult directed against me?>>> It better not be.>> Or [lie and insult deleted]?> > Fuck you.> Remember, context is key to valid arguments.  If you remove context, no one will understand what you're talking about.-- Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
0
Daniel
10/29/2007 5:41:26 AM
Lew wrote:> Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:> > The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.> > Also "persons".> > 2 plural : human beings, persons > > —often used in compounds instead of persons <salespeople> > <http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/people>> > Since when is this valid? The above was drilled into me so much it makesme cringe when people say "many persons"... I'm open to change myperception of course.-- Sabine Dinis BlochbergerOp3racionalwww.op3racional.eu
0
Sabine
10/29/2007 11:34:08 AM
Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:>>> The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.Lew wrote:>> Also "persons".>>> 2 plural : human beings, persons >>> often used in compounds instead of persons <salespeople> >> <http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/people>Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:> Since when is this valid? The above was drilled into me so much it makes> me cringe when people say "many persons"... I'm open to change my> perception of course.The reference, and Merriam-Webster is pretty reliable, makes it sound like "people" is an alternate plural for "person", not even the preferred one. There is no, repeat, no special note under "person" on m-w.com that it has an irregular plural, much less a date for when it acquired a regular plural.  It lists "person" as being from the 13th century, so one must conclude that's when "persons" became the plural.-- Lew
0
Lew
10/29/2007 12:44:36 PM
In article <fYydnX6zSNMoSLjanZ2dnUVZ_rqlnZ2d@comcast.com>,Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:>>>> The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.>>Lew wrote:>>> Also "persons".>>>> 2 plural : human beings, persons >>>> often used in compounds instead of persons <salespeople> >>> <http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/people>>>Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:>> Since when is this valid? The above was drilled into me so much it makes>> me cringe when people say "many persons"... I'm open to change my>> perception of course.>>The reference, and Merriam-Webster is pretty reliable, makes it sound like >"people" is an alternate plural for "person", not even the preferred one. >There is no, repeat, no special note under "person" on m-w.com that it has an >irregular plural, much less a date for when it acquired a regular plural.  It >lists "person" as being from the 13th century, so one must conclude that's >when "persons" became the plural.It could be a difference between British and American English.Non-native English speakers are often, I expect, taught rather strictOxford English in school, and in this variant of the language the "oneperson, many people" rule might hold?Any Oxford Englishmen around? :-)Cheers,	Bent D-- Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd                                    powered by emacs
0
bcd
10/29/2007 12:59:08 PM
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 11:34:08 GMT, Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:
> Lew wrote:
>
>> Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:
>> > The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.
>>
>> Also "persons".
>> > 2 plural : human beings, persons
>> > —often used in compounds instead of persons <salespeople>
>> <http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/people>
>>
>>
> Since when is this valid? The above was drilled into me so much it
> makes me cringe when people say "many persons"... I'm open to change
> my perception of course.

Consensus seems to be lacking:

http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/people.htm
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002487.html
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002488.html

/gordon

--
0
Gordon
10/29/2007 1:01:28 PM
Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:
>>>> The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.

Lew wrote:
>>> Also "persons".
>>>> people 2 plural : human beings, persons
>>>> ”often used in compounds instead of persons <salespeople>
>>> <http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/people>

Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:
>> Since when is this valid? The above was drilled into me so much it
>> makes me cringe when people say "many persons"... I'm open to change
>> my perception of course.

Gordon Beaton wrote:
> Consensus seems to be lacking:
> 
> http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/people.htm
> http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002487.html
> http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002488.html

All three of those sources agree that "persons" is a valid plural, but 
disagree as to whether "people" is a valid plural.  This answers the question 
as asked, when and whether "persons" is a valid plural - not only is it valid, 
since the 13th century (i.e., the development of modern English), but by some 
standards it is preferred.

-- 
Lew
0
Lew
10/29/2007 2:49:44 PM
Bent C Dalager wrote:> It could be a difference between British and American English.> Non-native English speakers are often, I expect, taught rather strict> Oxford English in school, and in this variant of the language the "one> person, many people" rule might hold?> I can definitely back this up. I was drilled as much as Sabine was.> Any Oxford Englishmen around? :-)> Well, I have my Oxford Dictionary if that counts ...Says right there:per�son, /noun/ (pl. people or, esp. in formal use, per�sons)That /kind of/ settles that. ;)/W
0
Wildemar
10/29/2007 3:42:57 PM
Bent C Dalager wrote:>> Any Oxford Englishmen around? :-)Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:> Well, I have my Oxford Dictionary if that counts ...> Says right there:> per·son, /noun/ (pl. people or, esp. in formal use, per·sons)> > That /kind of/ settles that. ;)And "peoples" is the plural of "people".-- Lew
0
Lew
10/29/2007 4:08:30 PM
Lew wrote:> [snip good evidence and vicious insults]> All three of those sources agree that "persons" is a valid plural, but > disagree as to whether "people" is a valid plural.  This answers the > question as asked, when and whether "persons" is a valid plural - not > only is it valid, since the 13th century (i.e., the development of > modern English), but by some standards it is preferred.> OK, but now a question to you, and everybody else:How and when do you (personally) use the word persons?(not a challange, I just want to know)/W
0
Wildemar
10/29/2007 4:23:02 PM
Lew wrote:> Bent C Dalager wrote:>>> Any Oxford Englishmen around? :-)> > Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:>> Well, I have my Oxford Dictionary if that counts ...>> Says right there:>> per·son, /noun/ (pl. people or, esp. in formal use, per·sons)>>>> That /kind of/ settles that. ;)> > And "peoples" is the plural of "people".> Yes, for Christ's sake! We got that a long time ago.How naggy ... ts-ts ...Also, does this mean that peoples is sort of a super-plural of person?Like several instances of several instances of a person?/W
0
Wildemar
10/29/2007 4:44:59 PM
Wildemar Wildenburger schrieb:> Lew wrote:>> Bent C Dalager wrote:>>>> Any Oxford Englishmen around? :-)>>>> Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:>>> Well, I have my Oxford Dictionary if that counts ...>>> Says right there:>>> per·son, /noun/ (pl. people or, esp. in formal use, per·sons)>>>>>> That /kind of/ settles that. ;)>>>> And "peoples" is the plural of "people".>>> Yes, for Christ's sake! We got that a long time ago.> > How naggy ... ts-ts ...> > Also, does this mean that peoples is sort of a super-plural of person?> Like several instances of several instances of a person?> > /WIn german peoples would mean something like "Völker"so yes but you seldom have this multiple multiple relation..as multiple multiple condense usually into multiple.
0
Christian
10/29/2007 4:55:03 PM
Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:> Lew wrote:>> Bent C Dalager wrote:>>>> Any Oxford Englishmen around? :-)>>>> Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:>>> Well, I have my Oxford Dictionary if that counts ...>>> Says right there:>>> per·son, /noun/ (pl. people or, esp. in formal use, per·sons)>>>>>> That /kind of/ settles that. ;)>>>> And "peoples" is the plural of "people".>>> Yes, for Christ's sake! We got that a long time ago.> > How naggy ... ts-ts ...> > Also, does this mean that peoples is sort of a super-plural of person?> Like several instances of several instances of a person?Babelfish English to German translates "peoples" to "Volker". Ittranslates "people" to "Leute". German to English maps both "Leute" and"Volk" to people."People" seems to be used in two different ways, as a sort of plural ofperson, and as a group of people somewhat like a nationality but notquite (Volk?).In the second sense: "All the peoples of the European Community have acommon interest in limiting European bureaucracy."PatriciaPatricia
0
Patricia
10/29/2007 4:57:26 PM
Wildemar Wildenburger wrote:> Also, does this mean that peoples is sort of a super-plural of person?> Like several instances of several instances of a person?As in "the English speaking peoples"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_History_of_the_English-Speaking_Peoples.
0
RedGrittyBrick
10/29/2007 5:06:56 PM
Christian wrote:>> Also, does this mean that peoples is sort of a super-plural of person?>> Like several instances of several instances of a person?>>>> /W> In german peoples would mean something like "Völker"> so yes but you seldom have this multiple multiple relation..> as multiple multiple condense usually into multiple.Urm ... how can I put this ...JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!:)/W
0
Wildemar
10/29/2007 5:19:34 PM
Patricia Shanahan wrote:> Babelfish English to German translates "peoples" to "Volker".No way? I mean John -> Johannes makes sense, as does William -> Willhelm, but peoples -> Volker? No way am I gonna accept that!(Note: Volker is a German(?) name. Well, how some people here are called anyway. The word you mean is Völker)> It> translates "people" to "Leute". German to English maps both "Leute" and> "Volk" to people.> Babelfish knows quite a lot. To elaborate even more: "Leute" means "bunch of humans", whereas "Volk" means ...> "People" seems to be used in two different ways, as a sort of plural of> person, and as a group of people somewhat like a nationality but not> quite (Volk?).> .... exactly that. :)/W
0
Wildemar
10/29/2007 5:28:47 PM
"Wildemar Wildenburger" <lasses_weil@klapptsowieso.net> wrote in message news:472608e6$0$4363$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net...> Lew wrote:>> [snip good evidence and vicious insults]>> All three of those sources agree that "persons" is a valid plural, but >> disagree as to whether "people" is a valid plural.  This answers the >> question as asked, when and whether "persons" is a valid plural - not >> only is it valid, since the 13th century (i.e., the development of modern >> English), but by some standards it is preferred.>>> OK, but now a question to you, and everybody else:>> How and when do you (personally) use the word persons?>> (not a challange, I just want to know)Only in very formal contexts.  Never in everyday speech. 
0
Mike
10/29/2007 6:30:04 PM
In article <fYydnX6zSNMoSLjanZ2dnUVZ_rqlnZ2d@comcast.com>, Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:>Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:>>>> The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.>>Lew wrote:>>> Also "persons".>>>> 2 plural : human beings, persons >>>> often used in compounds instead of persons <salespeople> >>> <http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/people>>>Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:>> Since when is this valid? The above was drilled into me so much it makes>> me cringe when people say "many persons"... I'm open to change my>> perception of course.>>The reference, and Merriam-Webster is pretty reliable,Did you check it against the star calendar?Or God himself wispered this in your elephant sized ears?>makes it sound like >"people" is an alternate plural for "person", not even the preferred one. >There is no, repeat, no special note under "person" on m-w.comSeid hail!-- The most powerful Usenet tool you have ever heard of.NewsMaestro v. 4.0.5 - Way Too Cool has been released.Automatic enablement of all buttons, checkboxes and fieldsdepending on operation.Templates generator improvements.Job list improvements for new installations having no jobsto begin with.In some previous releases some class files were missing.As a result, the program would not run.Sorry for the inconvenience.Multi-job support and other important feature additionsand various improvements and optimizations.Web page:http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/Download page:http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/Download_Information.htmSend any feedback to newsmaestroinfo \at/ mail.ru.Your personal info will not be released and your privacywill be honored.
0
almond
10/30/2007 1:23:39 AM
In article <p9GdnYrbPruVbrjanZ2dnUVZ_uKpnZ2d@comcast.com>, Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:
>>>>> The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.
>
>Lew wrote:
>>>> Also "persons".
>>>>> people 2 plural : human beings, persons
>>>>> ”often used in compounds instead of persons <salespeople>
>>>> <http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/people>
>
>Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:
>>> Since when is this valid? The above was drilled into me so much it
>>> makes me cringe when people say "many persons"... I'm open to change
>>> my perception of course.
>
>Gordon Beaton wrote:
>> Consensus seems to be lacking:
>> 
>> http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/people.htm
>> http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002487.html
>> http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002488.html
>
>All three of those sources agree that "persons" is a valid plural, but 
>disagree as to whether "people" is a valid plural.  This answers the question 
>as asked, when and whether "persons" is a valid plural - not only is it valid, 
>since the 13th century (i.e., the development of modern English), but by some 
>standards it is preferred.

On your knees, mortals!!!

-- 
The most powerful Usenet tool you have ever heard of.
NewsMaestro v. 4.0.5 - Way Too Cool has been released.

Automatic enablement of all buttons, checkboxes and fields
depending on operation.
Templates generator improvements.

Job list improvements for new installations having no jobs
to begin with.

In some previous releases some class files were missing.
As a result, the program would not run.
Sorry for the inconvenience.

Multi-job support and other important feature additions
and various improvements and optimizations.

Web page:
http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/

Download page:
http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/Download_Information.htm

Send any feedback to newsmaestroinfo \at/ mail.ru.
Your personal info will not be released and your privacy
will be honored.


0
almond
10/30/2007 1:24:19 AM
Bent C Dalager wrote:> In article <fYydnX6zSNMoSLjanZ2dnUVZ_rqlnZ2d@comcast.com>,> Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:> >Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:> >>>> The plural of "person" is "people". Thank you, good night *bows*.> >> >Lew wrote:> >>> Also "persons".> >>>> 2 plural : human beings, persons > >>>> often used in compounds instead of persons <salespeople> > >>> <http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/people>> >> >Sabine Dinis Blochberger wrote:> >> Since when is this valid? The above was drilled into me so much it makes> >> me cringe when people say "many persons"... I'm open to change my> >> perception of course.> >> >The reference, and Merriam-Webster is pretty reliable, makes it sound like > >"people" is an alternate plural for "person", not even the preferred one. > >There is no, repeat, no special note under "person" on m-w.com that it has an > >irregular plural, much less a date for when it acquired a regular plural.  It > >lists "person" as being from the 13th century, so one must conclude that's > >when "persons" became the plural.> > It could be a difference between British and American English.> Non-native English speakers are often, I expect, taught rather strict> Oxford English in school, and in this variant of the language the "one> person, many people" rule might hold?> Yep, that would be it. Answering "persons" to the question "what is theplural of person?" would be zero points, error, sit down, failed ;)> Any Oxford Englishmen around? :-)> > Cheers,>        Bent D> -- Sabine Dinis BlochbergerOp3racionalwww.op3racional.eu
0
Sabine
10/30/2007 10:06:57 AM
Reply: