Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vqcs6l$33ndr$3@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: The joy of FORTRAN
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 19:14:29 +0000
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <vqcs6l$33ndr$3@dont-email.me>
References: <59CJO.19674$MoU3.15170@fx36.iad>
 <m2sohjF3sciU1@mid.individual.net> <vqceia$g9g$1@reader1.panix.com>
 <Martin-20250306163721@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
 <vqck28$ki8$1@reader1.panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2025 20:14:29 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8774af32b9a5ea81776c073fd03363e6";
	logging-data="3268027"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+rqjxOfqkxCKWe77wKypPvTmc1uHC5YLI="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:D3ee0z6uB20nVeXIH7qk10Ftdns=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vqck28$ki8$1@reader1.panix.com>

On 06/03/2025 16:55, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article <Martin-20250306163721@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>,
> Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote or quoted:
>>> That describes Martin's books to a T, I think.  He writes very
>>> well, but what he writes, maybe not so much.
>>
>>   I first got to know Robert on Usenet, in comp.objects. Later, I read
>>   something in his book about the difference between object-oriented
>>   and structured, which hits the nail on the head regarding the
>>   crucial point about which of the two paradigms has what advantages.
>>   At least 99 percent of people who talk about this topic don't get
>>   this point. That's why Robert is head and shoulders above Herbert
>>   in my book - even if Martin might make the occasional mistake.
> 
> I mean, two times something that is very close to zero is still
> very close to zero.  :-)
> 
> 	- Dan C.
> 
No, its *twice as far away* from zero.



-- 
"A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight 
and understanding".

Marshall McLuhan