Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Janis Papanagnou Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: else ladders practice Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2024 11:00:30 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 34 Message-ID: References: <3deb64c5b0ee344acd9fbaea1002baf7302c1e8f@i2pn2.org> <86y117qhc8.fsf@linuxsc.com> <86cyiiqit8.fsf@linuxsc.com> <86mshkos1a.fsf@linuxsc.com> <86ed2tpqkc.fsf@linuxsc.com> <86a5dhpc5w.fsf@linuxsc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2024 11:00:31 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c8d859a1b53459d8bfc424860d3a2ade"; logging-data="1742908"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Rc04gABrICbD/1b0iW+af" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 Cancel-Lock: sha1:/xSQ5epo1FT2S5LvD/2qP/ypfZQ= X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 In-Reply-To: <86a5dhpc5w.fsf@linuxsc.com> Bytes: 2957 On 30.11.2024 05:40, Tim Rentsch wrote: > Janis Papanagnou writes: > >> On 30.11.2024 00:29, Tim Rentsch wrote: >> >>> Bart writes: >>> >>>> On 28/11/2024 17:28, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >>>> >>>>> But we're speaking about compilation times. [...] >>>> >>>> You can make a similar argument about turning on the light switch >>>> when entering a room. Flicking light switches is not something you >>>> need to do every few seconds, but if the light took 5 seconds to >>>> come on (or even one second), it would be incredibly annoying. >>> >>> This analogy sounds like something a defense attorney would say who >>> has a client that everyone knows is guilty. >> >> Intentionally or not; it's funny to respond to an analogy with an >> analogy. :-} > > My statement was not an analogy. Similar is not the same as > analogous. It's of course (and obviously) not the same; it's just a similar term where the semantics of both terms have an overlap. (Not sure why you even bothered to reply and nit-pick here. But with your habit you seem to have just missed the point; the comparison of your reply-type with Bart's argumentation.) Janis