Subject:
|
Re: Line in the Sand
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Sat, 13 Nov 1999 13:55:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3691 times
|
| |
|
|
[ Still discussing http://www.geocities.com/partsref/bfcspec.txt ]
Steve:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
> > I understand why you sometimes use specialised "programming"
> > languages for writing specifications.
>
> Did you mean you=Steve or you=anyone?
You=anyone (kind of - English is a very imprecise language - "on"
in French, "man" in Danish, ...)
> My point was, does CERTIFY BFC change the value of the
> internal local_clipping variable, or not? My intention
> was that it does not. From a practical viewpoint, it
> might as well, but it is not necessary for it to do so.
That depends on how the program is written. You could
imagine that the variable "local_clipping" isn't defined
until it is verified that it is relevant.
> > I don't think so. If you could translate my explanation
> > above to proper English, then the problem should be solved,
> > with the effect I understand you intended.
>
> How about some pseudo-code? Skipping a few beside-the-point details:
[...]
Good. I think this clarifies a lot.
> Ick. Longer than I thought. Maybe I'll go back to plain English.
I don't think you can make it shorter as plain English, but
I will not complain if you attempt.
Play well,
Jacob
------------------------------------------------
-- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk --
-- Web...: <URL:http://www.ldraw.org/FAQ/> --
------------------------------------------------
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Line in the Sand
|
| (...) Did you mean you=Steve or you=anyone? (...) I agree, the sequence should be illegal. My point was, does CERTIFY BFC change the value of the internal local_clipping variable, or not? My intention was that it does not. From a practical (...) (25 years ago, 12-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
85 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
