Subject:
|
Re: global output control
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc
|
Date:
|
Wed, 21 Jun 2000 05:37:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1641 times
|
| |
|
|
In article <slrn8l00qv.b12.mattdm@jadzia.bu.edu>, mattdm@mattdm.org
wrote:
> Dave Baum <dbaum@spambgoneenteract.com> wrote:
> > I know that RevertOutput was a bit hokey...sort of a combination of
> > inverting and restoring. I'm not sure how I feel about Obvert.
>
> It's a perfectly good word! (It's not in M-W, but OED has it. And M-W has
> "obverse"....) :)
>
> And, it describes exactly what you want.
Yes it is a great description of the actual function, however I feel the
word is a bit obscure and that's why I hesitate about using it. That's
what the "not sure" is...Obvert technically means the right thing, but
perhaps isn't obvious to many NQC users. I'm tempted, though.
I just know if I use it, I'll have to add "Is 'obvert' a real word?" to
the NQC FAQ!
Dave
--
reply to: dbaum at enteract dot com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
7 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
