"Thomas Bushnell, BSG" wrote: > > Jan Atle Ramsli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > So, I can safely assume that some word just flew a little to high for > > me, that ADTs are as valid as when I read about them for the first time, > > and that they are valid under the same rules that guide everything else: > > Relativity? > > No, you can't assume that either. I was quite careful in what I > wrote. Go back and read it again. >>There are--horror of horrors--data type problems that abstract data >>types are unable to adequately describe, and this is precisely what >>led to their demise as a fundamental organizing principle about ten >>years ago.
Which the means that the _have_ been replaced by something else? This is so confusing that I will have to abandon it if I will not be able to understand it. Atle _______________________________________________ Help-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-hurd
