Re: strlen(), K+1: clarification
- From: Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 14:23:43 +0000
spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Feb 22, 8:32 pm, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:<snip>
spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
<snip>
One issue can be resolved here. By posting repeatedly but snidely
about it without clarifying things (being a hater of clarity as shown
in his harassment of Schildt), Clive has managed to confuse a parallel
I drew last month between his use of K+1 to terminate a for loop
(where the C for repeatedly evaluates the for condition while the
Visual Basic and other for statements do not) and my use, in 2003, of
a strlen() in a for condition.
Ah, at last. Your repeated and persistent claims about the supposed
code posted by Clive Feather were, as I most people here had
concluded, not true. There was no strlen() in the loop condition. I
don't suppose you'll apologise for saying he made the same mistake as
you?
I saw Clive's mistake as the same overall mistake,
It is shame that you then said it *was* the same mistake rather just a
similar one. We could have disputed the similarity. Instead we
wasted time on a fictional accusation. You even told me to go look
for it (as if I had not already done so). That was, at best,
disingenuous.
<snip>... In fact, string concatenation and strings
themselves seem to form a group, mathematically, where a null string
is the zero element and, perhaps, a string of length one is 1.
This means that...
There is much wrong in here that I just can't face picking it apart.
I'll leave you to believe that strings + concatenation form a group
and that C can't be optimised.
If you happen to more group theory than me, I'd welcome an
explanation.
In a group, every element has a (unique) inverse under the operation.
That is the point of having an identity (and they don't need a unit).
I think you need practice in expressing yourself in
writing and comprehension: my experience on Lamma island was that
people who are deficient in these regards lose their temper and give
up.
You've kept your temper admirably.
A pat on the back and an insult all in two patronizing sentences.
But note that I didn't say "strings with concat are a group" because
I'm not a mathematician and have only an amateur's knowledge of groups
(which is more than most, but insufficient to speak with authority). I
said that because they are "like" a group,
You need help in expressing yourself. You did not say they are "like" a
group. You said they "seem to form a group". Who knows what either
of these mean. They are "like" a group except in those regards where
they are not like a group (because they aren't). They "seem to form a
group" right up to the point when you see that they don't.
--
Ben.
.
- References:
- strlen(), K+1: clarification
- From: spinoza1111
- Re: strlen(), K+1: clarification
- From: Ben Bacarisse
- Re: strlen(), K+1: clarification
- From: spinoza1111
- strlen(), K+1: clarification
- Prev by Date: Re: strlen(), K+1: clarification
- Next by Date: Re: strlen(), K+1: clarification
- Previous by thread: Re: strlen(), K+1: clarification
- Next by thread: Re: strlen(), K+1: clarification
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
