Le samedi 3 août 2013 13:35:29 UTC+2, Nicholas a écrit : > On Friday, 2 August 2013, Chris “Kwpolska” Warrick wrote: > > > [snip] > > > > So, what are you feasting for? Nothing? > > > I have long since ceased to be amazed at the number of people who would like > their personal and arbitrary preferences, and the rationalisations that go > with them, to be validated and endorsed by others, in law if possible and in > policy documents if not!
---------- I have always found, computer scientists are funny scientists. - They do love to solve the problems, they created themselves. - They have the tendency to take the consequences as the causalities. - And they forget: i) p => q <==> not(q) => not(p) ii) To proof a law is correct, one has to proof it's correct in all cases. To proof a law is incorrect, it is enough to find one, and solelely one, case showing the law is incorrect. In my computing experience, the "Python world" is really shining on these points. jmf -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list