Re: OT - Re: Looking for a *FAST* graphics library More options
- From: Richard Heathfield <rjh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 12:05:19 +0000
Flash Gordon said:
Richard Heathfield wrote, On 31/03/07 11:38:
Flash Gordon said:
Richard Heathfield wrote, On 31/03/07 09:02:
santosh said:Check the headers of Santosh's message. He added a follow-up to
user923005 wrote:You actually proved not that it does, but that it doesn't.
<snip>
P.S.Actually it does, as this post illustrates.
Google (so far as I know) lacks any ability to set followups, [
... ]
comp.lang.c. No visible effect because it was posted here, but it
proves the point.
Read it again, starting with user923005's article. You may find that
reading it aloud will help you get the point more easily.
user923005 said that Google lacks an ability to set follow ups,
Right.
Santosh said it had the ability
No, he didn't. That's what he intended to say, but it's not what he
actually said.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
.
- References:
- OT - Re: Looking for a *FAST* graphics library More options
- From: santosh
- Re: OT - Re: Looking for a *FAST* graphics library More options
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: OT - Re: Looking for a *FAST* graphics library More options
- From: Flash Gordon
- Re: OT - Re: Looking for a *FAST* graphics library More options
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: OT - Re: Looking for a *FAST* graphics library More options
- From: Flash Gordon
- OT - Re: Looking for a *FAST* graphics library More options
- Prev by Date: Re: C ethics question
- Next by Date: Re: Visual C++ support of C99 by using "C++ mode" (/TP)
- Previous by thread: Re: OT - Re: Looking for a *FAST* graphics library More options
- Next by thread: Difference between "library parts" of C99 and "language parts" of C99
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|