[ql-users] Assembly question
Hello everybody, My assembly being a little rusted, I would like to check with the knowledgeable people the following portion of code. ... tst.l d2 beq.s first_place second_place: ... Now, if d2 is 0, would executing that code reach first_place or second_place ? (I have my idea, but I do not want to influence the audience). Thanks for your attention.
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
Hello everybody, My assembly being a little rusted, I would like to check with the knowledgeable people the following portion of code. ... tst.l d2 beq.s first_place second_place: ... Now, if d2 is 0, would executing that code reach first_place or second_place ? (I have my idea, but I do not want to influence the audience). Is this a trick question? Given that you haven't actually maked the label first_place it may just depend on where you put that. In general, the tst x instruction is the same as cmp #0,x, so if d2 is zero, the branch will be taken. Joachim
Re: [ql-users] QMON2
Norman Dunbar wrote: I'm replying to myself - how sad :o) Dilwyn Jones replied A colleague was having a bad morning today. We knew he was having a bad morning, he'd gone beyond talking to himself, he was answering his own questions then when someone commented he claimed that was the most intelligent conversation I've had in this place for some time. We decided it was best to let him keep telling himself his jokes. I guess Jeff would have said to you that replying to yourself is not as bad as it seems, it means you've managed to figure something out for yourself and (allegedly) learned something! (at least that was his excuse for talking to himself, it drowned out the babble from the rest of us!) I used to solve a lot of problems this way but, since I moved to France I have started talking to myself in French. The trouble is, my French is so bad I cannot understand myself. Tony Tebby
RE: [ql-users] QMON2
Oh no : your French is very good ! -Message d'origine- De : TonyTebby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Envoyé : vendredi 17 janvier 2003 10:20 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: [ql-users] QMON2 (...) I used to solve a lot of problems this way but, since I moved to France I have started talking to myself in French. The trouble is, my French is so bad I cannot understand myself. Tony Tebby
RE: [ql-users] Assembly question
Morning Jerome, if D2.L is zero then you will branch to the firts_palce, if not, you'll drop into second_place. (Assuming you actually have a first_place in the code somewhere - otherwise, you'll get an assembly error :o) Cheers, Norman. PS. Can I recommend an excellent series of 'Learn Assembler or else' articles in QL Toady, back issues are available from All good Dilwyns everywhere :o) - Norman Dunbar Database/Unix administrator Lynx Financial Systems Ltd. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 0113 289 6265 Fax: 0113 289 3146 URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com - -Original Message- From: Jerome Grimbert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 8:27 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ql-users] Assembly question Hello everybody, My assembly being a little rusted, I would like to check with the knowledgeable people the following portion of code. ... tst.l d2 beq.s first_place second_place: ... This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not an addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the addressees of its existence or contents. If you have received this email and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990.
RE: [ql-users] QMON2
You should have heard me last night, I was flat out on the living room floor with a listing of the 'reg_list' subroutine from QLTDis and a trace listing of said routine where I had a register dump at the end of every step. Suffice to say the 'conversation' was 'interesting' - talking to yourself isn't a sign of madness, it's sometimes the only way to get a sensible answer :o) Cheers, Norman. PS. I managed to sort out the major bug too - still got more testing and a couple of minor bugs to go, but progress is being made. - Norman Dunbar Database/Unix administrator Lynx Financial Systems Ltd. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 0113 289 6265 Fax: 0113 289 3146 URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com - -Original Message- From: Dilwyn Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 7:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ql-users] QMON2 Norman Dunbar wrote: I'm replying to myself - how sad :o) A colleague was having a bad morning today. We knew he was having a bad morning, he'd gone beyond talking to himself, he was answering his own questions ... SNIP This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not an addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the addressees of its existence or contents. If you have received this email and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990.
Re: [ql-users] QMON2
On 17 Jan 2003, at 10:20, TonyTebby wrote: I used to solve a lot of problems this way but, since I moved to France I have started talking to myself in French. The trouble is, my French is so bad I cannot understand myself. Nor can anyone else... grin Wolfgang
RE: [ql-users] Assembly question
Jerome, Interesting question - and code ! harpo equ $160 chico equ $140 elem_size equ $0c clr.l a1A1 = 0 moveq.l #4,d2 lea harpo(a1),a1A1 = A1 + $160 = $160 myloop: adda.w elem_size,a1 A1 = A1 + (5 * $0c) = $19c dbra d2,myloop lea chico-4*elem_size(a1),a1A1 = $140 - $19c + (4 * $0c) = $140 - $1cc Question: what is the value of a1 at the end ? Well it could be $ff74 .. (I also have my idea, but I do not want to influence yet!) BUT it depends upong how good your assembler is, does it do expressions evaluation correctly so that the multiplication is done before the addition, or does it do it in-line ? My answer above shows what it should be (!) assuming correct precedence, but if the assembler is in-line, then it will be : (($140 - 4) * $0c) + $19c ($13c * $0c) + $19c $ed0 + $19c $106c So, which answer did you think ? By the way, you loop around FIVE times because the dbra instruction stops when the counter reaches -1, so we pass through the loop with d2 = 4,3,2,1 and then 0, adding $0c to a1 each time, so a1 ends up at $160 + (5 * $0c) which is (reaches for hex calculator ...) $19c. How did I do ? Cheers, Norman. - Norman Dunbar Database/Unix administrator Lynx Financial Systems Ltd. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 0113 289 6265 Fax: 0113 289 3146 URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com - This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not an addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the addressees of its existence or contents. If you have received this email and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990.
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
Jerome Grimbert wrote: Also, if you do not mind, another (tricker ?) question: harpo equ $160 chico equ $140 elem_size equ $0c clr.l a1 ; (just to fixe a1 to 0 for the question, ; irrelevant how to if illegal) ; but once a1 has been modified, we cannot have it back ; to THIS value moveq.l #4,d2 lea harpo(a1),a1 myloop: ...; use a1 but keep it adda.w elem_size,a1 This is probably not the code you wanted. It adds the word at memory address $00c to a1, i.e. a # is missing. ...; use a1 but keep it dbra d2,myloop lea chico-4*elem_size(a1),a1 Question: what is the value of a1 at the end ? (I also have my idea, but I do not want to influence yet!) Disregarding the bug it's $160 + 5 * $0c + $140 - 4 * $0c = $160 + $120 + $0c = $28c. Marcel
RE: [ql-users] Assembly question
Curses, I have been found out ! I agree that an assembler *should* evaluate expressions properly, but some don't I'm afraid. QMAC seems to do it, but GWASL (ie the light version) can't assemble the original code for the lea instruction. I can't remember if the original GST non-macro assembler did it correctly or not. Anyway, as written the code is a bit misleading, in the loop the CONTENTS of ADDRESS elem_size is being added to A1, which on my QPCv3 is zero, so at the end of the loop, A1 is still set to $160, then the lea changes it to $270. Rerunning the code to add #elem_size to A1 each time results in a1 coming out of the loop set to $19C and then changing to £2AC after the final lea. So the code as written sets A1 to $270 on exit. 'Corrected' code sets A1 to $2AC on exit. The expression chico-4*elem_size evaluates to $110 using the QMAC assmebler so it does evaluate correctly. Thanks for correcting my 'interesting' version of how LEA works !! Cheers, Norman. - Norman Dunbar Database/Unix administrator Lynx Financial Systems Ltd. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 0113 289 6265 Fax: 0113 289 3146 URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com - -Original Message- From: Marcel Kilgus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:15 AM To: ql-users Subject: Re: [ql-users] Assembly question Norman Dunbar wrote: lea chico-4*elem_size(a1),a1A1 = $140 - $19c + (4 * $0c) = $140 - $1cc Huh, interesting interpretation of LEA, but I'm afraid your 68k might disagree ;-) The address register is the base (i.e. always added), chico-4*elem_size is the offset. And of course an assembler must obey the rule to multiply first, otherwise it's trash. How did I do ? I'm afraid you have to take that exam again ;-) Ciao, Marcel This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not an addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the addressees of its existence or contents. If you have received this email and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990.
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
- Original Message - From: Norman Dunbar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:30 AM Subject: RE: [ql-users] Assembly question Norman, could it be you have some problems with signs??? Interesting question - and code ! harpo equ $160 chico equ $140 elem_size equ $0c clr.l a1 A1 = 0 moveq.l #4,d2 lea harpo(a1),a1 A1 = A1 + $160 = $160 myloop: adda.w elem_size,a1 A1 = A1 + (5 * $0c) = $19c dbra d2,myloop lea chico-4*elem_size(a1),a1 A1 = $140 - $19c + (4 * $0c) = $140 - $1cc Would this not be $140 - (4 * $0c) + $19c ??? BUT it depends upong how good your assembler is, does it do expressions evaluation correctly so that the multiplication is done before the addition, or does it do it in-line ? Very good point !! Bettr not to make to many assumptions ! My answer above shows what it should be (!) assuming correct precedence, but if the assembler is in-line, then it will be : Joachim
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
- Original Message - From: Marcel Kilgus [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: ql-users [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] Assembly question Marcel seems to have less problems with sign, though typing is not his biggest forte. adda.w elem_size,a1 This is probably not the code you wanted. It adds the word at memory address $00c to a1, i.e. a # is missing. Wow, very strong. This is the kind of features that make writing (and debugging) assembler interesting. Question: what is the value of a1 at the end ? Disregarding the bug it's $160 + 5 * $0c + $140 - 4 * $0c = $160 + $120 + $0c = $28c. That line should read = $160 + $120 +*0c = $2ac Unless there is some magix which changes $140 into $120 that is... Joachim Marcel
RE: [ql-users] Assembly question
Hi Joachim, no I don't have problems with signs, except when trying to determin which Bcc instructions to use after some singed comparisons :o) I do, as Marcel kindly pointed out, have problems understanding how the LEA instruction actually works ! Cheers, Norman. - Norman Dunbar Database/Unix administrator Lynx Financial Systems Ltd. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 0113 289 6265 Fax: 0113 289 3146 URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com - -Original Message- From: Joachim Van der Auwera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:28 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ql-users] Assembly question - Original Message - From: Norman Dunbar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:30 AM Subject: RE: [ql-users] Assembly question Norman, could it be you have some problems with signs??? SNIP This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not an addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the addressees of its existence or contents. If you have received this email and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990.
OT: Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
What, using a computer to solve the puzzle... You cheater :-) Joachim P.S. hey, at least I gave the right answer (and fastest too - must be working really hard at the moment), even if I didn't do the actual hex calculations. Not that I want to brag about it. - Original Message - From: Norman Dunbar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 12:30 PM Subject: RE: [ql-users] Assembly question Curses, I have been found out ! I agree that an assembler *should* evaluate expressions properly, but some don't I'm afraid. QMAC seems to do it, but GWASL (ie the light version) can't assemble the original code for the lea instruction. I can't remember if the original GST non-macro assembler did it correctly or not. Anyway, as written the code is a bit misleading, in the loop the CONTENTS of ADDRESS elem_size is being added to A1, which on my QPCv3 is zero, so at the end of the loop, A1 is still set to $160, then the lea changes it to $270. Rerunning the code to add #elem_size to A1 each time results in a1 coming out of the loop set to $19C and then changing to £2AC after the final lea. So the code as written sets A1 to $270 on exit. 'Corrected' code sets A1 to $2AC on exit. The expression chico-4*elem_size evaluates to $110 using the QMAC assmebler so it does evaluate correctly. Thanks for correcting my 'interesting' version of how LEA works !! Cheers, Norman. - Norman Dunbar Database/Unix administrator Lynx Financial Systems Ltd. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 0113 289 6265 Fax: 0113 289 3146 URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com - -Original Message- From: Marcel Kilgus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:15 AM To: ql-users Subject: Re: [ql-users] Assembly question Norman Dunbar wrote: lea chico-4*elem_size(a1),a1A1 = $140 - $19c + (4 * $0c) = $140 - $1cc Huh, interesting interpretation of LEA, but I'm afraid your 68k might disagree ;-) The address register is the base (i.e. always added), chico-4*elem_size is the offset. And of course an assembler must obey the rule to multiply first, otherwise it's trash. How did I do ? I'm afraid you have to take that exam again ;-) Ciao, Marcel This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not an addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the addressees of its existence or contents. If you have received this email and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990.
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
Marcel Kilgus wrote: Disregarding the bug it's $160 + 5 * $0c + $140 - 4 * $0c = $160 + $120 + $0c = $28c. Speaking to myself (...), there's of course a typo. It's $160 + $140 + $0c = $2ac Marcel
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
I do, as Marcel kindly pointed out, have problems understanding how the LEA instruction actually works ! It becomes much easier if you have ever had a look at the opcodes. You then know there is only an offset and nothing to indicate the sign of the data in the register. Joachim
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
Marcel Kilgus makes some magical things to make me read } Jerome Grimbert wrote: } Also, if you do not mind, another (tricker ?) question: } } harpo equ $160 } chico equ $140 } elem_size equ $0c } } clr.l a1 ; (just to fixe a1 to 0 for the question, } ; irrelevant how to if illegal) } ; but once a1 has been modified, we cannot have it back } ; to THIS value } } moveq.l #4,d2 } lea harpo(a1),a1 } myloop: } ...; use a1 but keep it } adda.w elem_size,a1 } } This is probably not the code you wanted. It adds the word at memory } address $00c to a1, i.e. a # is missing. Obviously! Sorry for that missing # typo! } } ...; use a1 but keep it } dbra d2,myloop } lea chico-4*elem_size(a1),a1 } } Question: what is the value of a1 at the end ? } (I also have my idea, but I do not want to influence yet!) } } Disregarding the bug it's $160 + 5 * $0c + $140 - 4 * $0c } = $160 + $120 + $0c = $28c. Yes... looks like there is two concordants view for that ending value. At least, I can be sure that the value of a1 is at least harpo+chico! (which is not what should be, in the spirit of the code and expected data, but that's my problem now to solve.)
RE: [ql-users] Assembly question
Hi Jerome, The dbra, stops when the counter is at -1. So your example executes the loop 5 times with d2 set to 4 then 3 then 2 then 1 then 0 and finally stops. Cheers, Norman - Norman Dunbar Database/Unix administrator Lynx Financial Systems Ltd. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 0113 289 6265 Fax: 0113 289 3146 URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com - This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not an addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the addressees of its existence or contents. If you have received this email and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990.
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
On 17 Jan 2003, at 11:04, Jerome Grimbert wrote: harpo equ $160 chico equ $140 elem_size equ $0c clr.l a1 ; (just to fixe a1 to 0 for the question, ; irrelevant how to if illegal) ; but once a1 has been modified, we cannot have it back ; to THIS value moveq.l #4,d2 lea harpo(a1),a1 myloop: ...; use a1 but keep it adda.w elem_size,a1 ...; use a1 but keep it dbra d2,myloop lea chico-4*elem_size(a1),a1 Question: what is the value of a1 at the end ? (I also have my idea, but I do not want to influence yet!) Ignoring the adda error (should be adda #elem_size,A1) the result should be :original content of A1 + harpo + chico + elem_size. which, using your values would be $160+ $140 + $c = $2AC (in the loop, you add 5 times elem_size, deduct it 4 times later) Wolfgang
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
On 17 Jan 2003, at 12:30, Joachim Van der Auwera wrote: Wow, very strong. This is the kind of features that make writing (and debugging) assembler interesting. Yeah, right, next you're gonna suggest we switch to 'C'. :-))) Wolfgang
RE: Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
Hi Joachim, now then, what's wrong with using a tool to get a job done then ? After all, computers are *supposed* to make life easier for us arn't they ? Mind you, in Dilwyn's case Cheers, Norman. - Norman Dunbar Database/Unix administrator Lynx Financial Systems Ltd. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 0113 289 6265 Fax: 0113 289 3146 URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com - -Original Message- From: Joachim Van der Auwera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:36 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Re: [ql-users] Assembly question What, using a computer to solve the puzzle... You cheater :-) Joachim P.S. hey, at least I gave the right answer (and fastest too - must be working really hard at the moment), even if I didn't do the actual hex calculations. Not that I want to brag about it. - Original Message - From: Norman Dunbar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 12:30 PM Subject: RE: [ql-users] Assembly question Curses, I have been found out ! I agree that an assembler *should* evaluate expressions properly, but some don't I'm afraid. QMAC seems to do it, but GWASL (ie the light version) can't assemble the original code for the lea instruction. I can't remember if the original GST non-macro assembler did it correctly or not. Anyway, as written the code is a bit misleading, in the loop the CONTENTS of ADDRESS elem_size is being added to A1, which on my QPCv3 is zero, so at the end of the loop, A1 is still set to $160, then the lea changes it to $270. Rerunning the code to add #elem_size to A1 each time results in a1 coming out of the loop set to $19C and then changing to £2AC after the final lea. So the code as written sets A1 to $270 on exit. 'Corrected' code sets A1 to $2AC on exit. The expression chico-4*elem_size evaluates to $110 using the QMAC assmebler so it does evaluate correctly. Thanks for correcting my 'interesting' version of how LEA works !! Cheers, Norman. - Norman Dunbar Database/Unix administrator Lynx Financial Systems Ltd. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 0113 289 6265 Fax: 0113 289 3146 URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com - -Original Message- From: Marcel Kilgus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:15 AM To: ql-users Subject: Re: [ql-users] Assembly question Norman Dunbar wrote: lea chico-4*elem_size(a1),a1A1 = $140 - $19c + (4 * $0c) = $140 - $1cc Huh, interesting interpretation of LEA, but I'm afraid your 68k might disagree ;-) The address register is the base (i.e. always added), chico-4*elem_size is the offset. And of course an assembler must obey the rule to multiply first, otherwise it's trash. How did I do ? I'm afraid you have to take that exam again ;-) Ciao, Marcel This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not an addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the addressees of its existence or contents. If you have received this email and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990. This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not an addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the addressees of its existence or contents. If you have received this email and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990.
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
Joachim Van der Auwera wrote: This is probably not the code you wanted. It adds the word at memory address $00c to a1, i.e. a # is missing. Wow, very strong. This is the kind of features that make writing (and debugging) assembler interesting. Only the first few times, after that it springs to ones eye ;-) More difficult to spots in complex and/or large codes are often things like wrong registers. Only 3 days ago I finally fixed a nasty bug that lived in the PE for about 12 years. It drew weird windows or crashed the machine when there was only little free memory. A mix up between a1 and a2 was all it took. Now find that within some large piece of code you can't use a debugger on. Marcel (currently looking at and writing 68k assembler about 5 hours a day...)
Re: [ql-users] Assembly question
Marcel Kilgus makes some magical things to make me read } } More difficult to spots in complex and/or large codes are often things } like wrong registers. Only 3 days ago I finally fixed a nasty bug that } lived in the PE for about 12 years. It drew weird windows or crashed } the machine when there was only little free memory. A mix up between } a1 and a2 was all it took. Now find that within some large piece of } code you can't use a debugger on. Oh, while you speak of the PE, I will jump in the wagon... I have just found out that blob and mask when used in an information windows (How silly, it would be simpler to use a sprite instead!), seems to have their origin at the screen origin, not the window origin... (whereas sprite are just ok...) Is-that the normal behaviour ?
Re: [ql-users] QMON2
On Friday, January 17, 2003, at 02:00 AM, Wolfgang Lenerz wrote: On 17 Jan 2003, at 10:20, TonyTebby wrote: I used to solve a lot of problems this way but, since I moved to France I have started talking to myself in French. The trouble is, my French is so bad I cannot understand myself. Nor can anyone else... grin Wolfgang Is the understanding an issue only when you are speaking French? I that it was a universal thing with Tony (or perhaps me) :) jim
Re: [ql-users] Using WMAN and EasyPTR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There will be some more stuff, but that is still on the drawing board. Anyway, I will try to answer any questions anyone might have. Send it over please Marcel... Can do, but mind you this is is still subject to change. BTW - have you had any more thoughts on a runtime QPC2?? No, sorry. In fact I completely forgot about it. Too much other stuff going on right now, but I'll add it to my to-do queue. Marcel
Re: [ql-users] QMON2
- Original Message - From: Tony Firshman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 10:19 AM Subject: Re: [ql-users] QMON2 On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 at 10:20:20, TonyTebby wrote: (ref: 003001c2be09$cc9512a0$34b2933e@tony) Norman Dunbar wrote: I'm replying to myself - how sad :o) Dilwyn Jones replied A colleague was having a bad morning today. We knew he was having a bad morning, he'd gone beyond talking to himself, he was answering his own questions then when someone commented he claimed that was the most intelligent conversation I've had in this place for some time. We decided it was best to let him keep telling himself his jokes. I guess Jeff would have said to you that replying to yourself is not as bad as it seems, it means you've managed to figure something out for yourself and (allegedly) learned something! (at least that was his excuse for talking to himself, it drowned out the babble from the rest of us!) I used to solve a lot of problems this way but, since I moved to France I have started talking to myself in French. The trouble is, my French is so bad I cannot understand myself. Thanks for that Tony. Is it equally mad to fall about laughing alone in ones office - tears and all. Quote from a member of another list I'm on I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it now that's a philosophy to follow (:-) All the best - Bill
