Martin P. Hellwig martin.hell...@dcuktec.org wrote:
Or you can argue that even when an argument is repeated indefinitely it
doesn't make it suddenly right.
This is no good.
It's a well known fact that anything I tell you three times is true.
To demonstrate:
Tim Rowe's post earlier in this
On 23 Jan., 08:13, Philip Semanchuk phi...@semanchuk.com wrote:
On Jan 23, 2009, at 12:39 AM, Kay Schluehr wrote:
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
Is this a variant of Godwin's Law
2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr kay.schlu...@gmx.net:
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is that we
need to remove reference counting and
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Tim Rowe digi...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr kay.schlu...@gmx.net:
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
Well, maybe, but it seems to me
I dub it Schluehr's law.
On Thu, 2009-01-22 at 21:39 -0800, Kay Schluehr wrote:
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
--
2009/1/23 Benjamin Kaplan benjamin.kap...@case.edu:
BTW, he said sufficiently sophisticated topic. Since there hasn't been an
extremely long post here yet, I don't know if this counts.
Had I waited until the thread became long enough, somebody else would
have already raised the issue -- you
Tim Rowe wrote:
2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr kay.schlu...@gmx.net:
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is that we
need to remove
Tim Rowe wrote:
2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr kay.schlu...@gmx.net:
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is that we
need to remove
2009/1/23 Martin P. Hellwig martin.hell...@dcuktec.org:
Or you can argue that even when an argument is repeated indefinitely it
doesn't make it suddenly right.
No, but it makes for a confirmation of Schluehr's law :-)
--
Tim Rowe
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Kay Schluehr kay.schlu...@gmx.net wrote:
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
+1 QOTW
- Chris
--
Follow the path of the Iguana...
http://rebertia.com
--
On Jan 23, 2009, at 12:39 AM, Kay Schluehr wrote:
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
Is this a variant of Godwin's Law for Python?
--
12 matches
Mail list logo
