On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Craig James craig_ja...@emolecules.com wrote:
I disagree -- it's a glaring error. More optimized or better optimized
are perfectly good, and correct, phrases. Why not use them? Every time I
read more optimal, I am embarrassed for the person who is showing
David Wilson wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Angel Alvarez cl...@uah.es wrote:
we suffer a 'more optimal' superlative missuse
there is not so 'more optimal' thing but a simple 'better' thing.
im not native english speaker but i think it still applies.
Well this a superlative list
cl...@uah.es (Angel Alvarez) writes:
more optimal plan...
morreoptimal configuration...
we suffer a 'more optimal' superlative missuse
there is not so 'more optimal' thing but a simple 'better' thing.
im not native english speaker but i think it still applies.
If I wanted to be pedantic
El Miércoles, 13 de Mayo de 2009 Tom Lane escribió:
Chris Browne cbbro...@acm.org writes:
cl...@uah.es (Angel Alvarez) writes:
there is not so 'more optimal' thing but a simple 'better' thing.
If I wanted to be pedantic about it, I'd say that the word nearly is
missing.
That is, it
Dear List mates,
more optimal plan...
morreoptimal configuration...
we suffer a 'more optimal' superlative missuse
there is not so 'more optimal' thing but a simple 'better' thing.
im not native english speaker but i think it still applies.
Well this a superlative list so all of you deserve
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Angel Alvarez cl...@uah.es wrote:
we suffer a 'more optimal' superlative missuse
there is not so 'more optimal' thing but a simple 'better' thing.
im not native english speaker but i think it still applies.
Well this a superlative list so all of you
