Victor A. Wagner, Jr. writes:
when the sex of the entity is unknown, in English the male pronouns shall
be used.
And my wife thinks it laughable whenever she sees articles on computer-related
topics refer to an unknown programmer or user as she. To do so is just
incorrect, unless it is
Beman Dawes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
I'm all for bending over backwards to protect Booster's intellectual
property rights, but I having a lot of trouble applying IP concepts to
such
a posting. Am I off-base here?
I think you're spot-on,
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 21:20:14 +0200, Peter Dimov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now I have to put on my inference hat.
...so the use of identity assures that we have a non-deduced
context, which causes the explicit template parameter to be required?
...I
From: Gennaro Prota [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 21:20:14 +0200, Peter Dimov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now I have to put on my inference hat.
...so the use of identity assures that we have a non-deduced
context, which causes the explicit
David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Victor A. Wagner, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
PC run amok
No, you can't blame that on a malfunctioning PC. That was just me
being intentionally considerate.
In this case, I suspect PC ==
David B. Held [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
asausf$r0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:asausf$r0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[...]
However, when talking about a specific individual, and not an anonymous
person, I think it is quite appropriate to use the correct gender, if it
is
known.
[...]
After
David B. Held [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Victor A. Wagner, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
PC run amok
No, you can't blame that on a malfunctioning PC. That was just me
being intentionally
David B. Held [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David B. Held [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
asausf$r0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:asausf$r0r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[...]
However, when talking about a specific individual, and not an anonymous
person, I think it is quite appropriate to use the correct
David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[...]
Oh! I have never ever heard that term before!! Thanks for explaining
it to me!!!
Umm...my sarcasm detector is giving me an ambiguous reading... :(
Without that explanation, I'm sure I would
David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[...]
how does that make Victor's point?
Historically, the masculine gender was used to denote an anonymous
person, with no intended message about the superiority of any gender.
It isn't until very
David B. Held [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[...]
how does that make Victor's point?
Historically, the masculine gender was used to denote an anonymous
person, with no intended message about the
Hmm...
a lot of energy wasted on whether to use he or she. So lets waste some more
time...
Here in Denmark the correct way to refer to a person (of both genders) in
a representative sense is simply he. Nobody is foolish enough to think
its literally a man.
So if the persons gender is unknown,
Gennaro Prota [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:48:01 +0200, Peter Dimov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Here's what I think might be a correct implementation:
template class T, class U T implicit_cast(U const x) { return x; }
Gennaro Prota [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:15:21 -0500, David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thoughts?
This is one... A nice thing about the problem you are talking about is
that any function having a parameter of type T is in fact a general
detector of
On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:15:21 -0500, David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thoughts?
This is one... A nice thing about the problem you are talking about is
that any function having a parameter of type T is in fact a general
detector of convertibility to T (It's also worth noting that it
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:48:01 +0200, Peter Dimov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Here's what I think might be a correct implementation:
template class T, class U T implicit_cast(U const x) { return x; }
template class T, class U T implicit_cast(U x) {
16 matches
Mail list logo
