Subject:
|
Re: A brick in page 10 of #7777
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.pun
|
Date:
|
Sun, 12 Nov 2000 16:11:02 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
cmasi@cmasi.=IHateSpam=chem.tulane.edu
|
Viewed:
|
468 times
|
| |
|
|
Manfred Moolhuysen wrote:
>
> In lugnet.trains, Jonathan Wilson writes:
> > > Sets that this part contained:
> > ROFL :)
>
> Hey, I can't help the part is an antiquity, I just answered the question.
> And I've used past tense on purpose :-)
Sets that contained this part.
Not
Sets that this part contained. (This statement says that the entire set is
inside or contained by that one part.)
I didn't laugh. In fact, I knew what you meant to say, so I didn't even notice
the error until someone pointed it out.
Chris
--
PGP public key available upon request.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: A brick in page 10 of #7777
|
| I'm going to be silly, here so don't take me seriously. (...) Of course, a thing is a proper subset of itself, and thus can be said to "contain" itself. With the trend toward juniorisation continuing, how long before we actually get Burp Adventure (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
