On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 10:18:17 +0200, Thomas Davie <ta...@kent.ac.uk> wrote:
>On 3 Apr 2009, at 09:25, Benjamin L.Russell wrote: > >>[...] >> >> Or is that a logo of two octopi, one with four arms, and the other >> with three? Oh no, the poor octopi! > >If it's an octopi, surely it should have 3.1415926... arms? Where's >the 0.1415926...? Actually, according to the Wikipedia entry for "octopus" (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octopus), I probably should have written the plural as either "octopuses" or "octopodes": >The Oxford English Dictionary (2004 update[26]) lists octopuses, octopi > and octopodes (in that order); it labels octopodes "rare", and notes >that octopi derives from the mistaken assumption that octopus is a > second declension Latin noun, which it is not. Since the 3.1415926... derives from a mistaken assumption, the 0.1415926... disappears in a poof of logic. -- Benjamin L. Russell -- Benjamin L. Russell / DekuDekuplex at Yahoo dot com http://dekudekuplex.wordpress.com/ Translator/Interpreter / Mobile: +011 81 80-3603-6725 "Furuike ya, kawazu tobikomu mizu no oto." -- Matsuo Basho^ _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell