From: Xah Lee
Subject: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <1114517718.854029.125010@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines

20050222

Computing Folks of the industry:

please spread the debunking of the truncating line business of the
fucking unix-loving fuckheads, as outlines here:
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/truncate_line.html

if this myth-debunking is known widely enough, there wouldn't be any
more line truncating business.

emacs community has always been a thinking community as opposed to the
unix criminals. However by historical happenstance, the emacs of GNU's
Not Unix is essentially a program for unixes, so unavoidable it has to
deal with and inherit some of the ill shits of unix, if for nothing
but to be practical.

However, as of today, emacs don't really have reason to have
arrow-down behavior to be dependent on the hard-coded line wraps. I
want the next emacs version's down-arrow behavior to be fixed. (and
optionally as another mode to move by EOL.)

The reason for this change is easy. For those habituated with hard
wrapped lines, this would cause no difference. However, for those who
have lines that return at logical places, this would be an
improvement. (This is the intuitive way, and all non-geek editors
behave this way, even most editors or IDEs designed for programing.)

The need in this change is significant. By the current behavior of
down-arrow by EOL char, it discourages logical line breaking,
encourages hard-coded line breaking, and engenders the huge and
wide-spread problems as a consequence (as partially detailed in the
url given above): Programs posted online are broken, the who-said-what
quoting systems are a mess to process and comprehend, and needless
complex programs that processes and re-process the hard-wrapped
lines... And also it seeds the bad notions by creation of a generation
of imperative languages based on hard-line wraps (e.g. many
languages's line comment; and cannot be nested), and the misleading
and harmful habituation in IT of sizing software by
EOL-counting. (both of these are hindrances to functional programing.)

Further, in programing there's large chapters and energy spent on
what's called "coding style", which refers to the petty issue of when
and how to press a return so the lines all jag in some uniform
way. This ubiquitous "coding style" activity is helped by the
hard-wrap habit of thinking, which created these EOL-centric language
syntaxes in the first place.

(
When coding in a programing language, the programer should never have
to enter returns for the sake of display-formatting. The language's
syntax and the editor should be able to display the code well on the
fly by a simple parsing. Some 90% of EOL in codes today are there
manually entered by programer that does not serve any function other
than hard-coded pretty-printing.
 (as oppose to the sometimes a intentional return to make a point in
  the code, either as logical break, or emphasizing a section.)

And as a consequence of these EOL-centric languages is that attention
are put on code by the lines, instead of functional or logical
units. For example, comments tends to be based on lines of code, as
opposed to on a functional unit or algorithm. Boolean clauses inside
IF clause each span a line, as opposed to being together as a
predicate unit.
 (which smother new developments of such predicate unit in language
  syntax or semantics)
IF blocks almost always span multiple lines, as opposed to the idea of
coherent unit of “if PREDICATE do BLOCK”.
 (and such EOL-centric code tends to engender practices such as
  calling and setting global variables here and there inside code
  blocks).
 Temporary variables occupy a line by themselves, as oppose to tucked
 inconspicuously inside its functional unit...etc and so on.
 (a example of a language that is not EOL-centric is Mathematica,
  which displays the code with sensible justification, all done
  automatically behind the scenes, just as a word processor is to
  writing.
  (and the language happens also to display typeset mathematics on the
   fly.)
  Similar mileu are in LISP languages, but they did not push this idea
  further.
  (That is to say, in LISP communities, they on occasion still do and
   talk about the petty issues of manual return-pressing, even their
   languages are potentially immune to the hard-wrap problems.
  )
 )
)

I hope the above is some elucidation on the hard-wrap and
line-truncation business. Please spread the info.

---------
This email is archived at
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/hard-wrap.html

 Xah
 ···@xahlee.org
∑ http://xahlee.org/
From: jacob navia
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <426e55e9$0$1219$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr>
Xah Lee wrote:
> The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
> 
> 20050222
> 
> Computing Folks of the industry:
> 
> please spread the debunking of the truncating line business of the
> fucking unix-loving fuckheads, as outlines here:
> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/truncate_line.html
> 

What I find *really* funny is that document is formatted.... using
at most 80 columns :-)
From: Forrest Black
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <E2Ube.45$Sj6.2454@news.uswest.net>
jacob navia wrote:

> Xah Lee wrote:
> 
>> The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines

> What I find *really* funny is that document is formatted.... using
> at most 80 columns :-)

I find Xah Lee offensive and just plain stupid.  What is this doing in 
comp.lang groups?

Blargh.
From: Martin Ambuhl
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <BtUbe.285$V01.228@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Forrest Black wrote:

> I find Xah Lee offensive and just plain stupid.  What is this doing in 
> comp.lang groups?

Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage 
newsgroups?
From: Chris McDonald
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <d4p490$u1k$1@enyo.uwa.edu.au>
Martin Ambuhl <·······@earthlink.net> writes:

>Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage 
>newsgroups?


Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).

-- 
Chris.
From: Ulrich Hobelmann
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <3daltiF6runt1U1@individual.net>
Chris McDonald wrote:
> Martin Ambuhl <·······@earthlink.net> writes:
> 
> 
>>Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage 
>>newsgroups?
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
> From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).
> 

I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified 
otherwise, just because they developed first and because their 
users speak English.  German newsgroups, for instance, are part of 
the de.* hierarchy.  I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too.

It's no restriction, just a convention.  It's like not going into 
an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the 
waiter/waitress for ordering food.

-- 
No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's 
consent. -- Abraham Lincoln
From: Chris McDonald
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <d4p8em$2ap$2@enyo.uwa.edu.au>
Ulrich Hobelmann <···········@web.de> writes:

>I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified 
>otherwise, just because they developed first and because their 
>users speak English.  German newsgroups, for instance, are part of 
>the de.* hierarchy.  I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too.

>It's no restriction, just a convention.  It's like not going into 
>an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the 
>waiter/waitress for ordering food.

We all certainly appreciate that there are conventions, but I am
uncomfortable with suggestions that languages other than English don't
belong in newgroups that have traditionally used English  (outbursts are
increasingly seen).  One can argue that USENET is dying a slow death,
and maybe hundreds on millions of Chinese won't even start using it.
But given how closely guarded topics of discussion must be in this
newsgroup to receive helpful responses, let's hope that someone will
provide definitive answers in cn.comp.lang.c. too.

-- 
Chris.
From: Ulrich Hobelmann
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <3danj4F6s6ojmU1@individual.net>
Chris McDonald wrote:
> Ulrich Hobelmann <···········@web.de> writes:
> 
> 
>>I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified 
>>otherwise, just because they developed first and because their 
>>users speak English.  German newsgroups, for instance, are part of 
>>the de.* hierarchy.  I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too.
> 
> 
>>It's no restriction, just a convention.  It's like not going into 
>>an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the 
>>waiter/waitress for ordering food.
> 
> 
> We all certainly appreciate that there are conventions, but I am
> uncomfortable with suggestions that languages other than English don't
> belong in newgroups that have traditionally used English  (outbursts are
> increasingly seen).  One can argue that USENET is dying a slow death,
> and maybe hundreds on millions of Chinese won't even start using it.
> But given how closely guarded topics of discussion must be in this
> newsgroup to receive helpful responses, let's hope that someone will
> provide definitive answers in cn.comp.lang.c. too.
> 

Aber ich finde es ziemlich unh�flich, in ein englisches Forum 
einfach deutschen Kram zu posten, nur weil mir gerade danach ist.

Isn't that kind of rude?

Seriously, they are free to post their language in their 
newsgroups.  If I wanted to write German stuff or other languages, 
I'd go look for groups in that language.

I'm sure that lots of Chinese have their means of communication on 
the internet.  I'm thankful that they respect that these 
newsgroups are English newsgroups, just as I respect that.

I don't post English stuff in Chinese groups either, cause they 
might not understand it.

-- 
No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's 
consent. -- Abraham Lincoln
From: Matthias Buelow
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <42702BEB.7020708@incubus.de>
Ulrich Hobelmann wrote:

> Aber ich finde es ziemlich unh�flich, in ein englisches Forum einfach
> deutschen Kram zu posten, nur weil mir gerade danach ist.

Ich find das ganz Ok; jetzt wo wir Papst sind, koennen wir uns sowas ja
erlauben...

mkb.

[Newsgroups: auf c.l.lisp getrimmt...]
From: Ulrich Hobelmann
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <42703E62.5000002@web.de>
Matthias Buelow wrote:
> Ulrich Hobelmann wrote:
> 
> 
>>Aber ich finde es ziemlich unh�flich, in ein englisches Forum einfach
>>deutschen Kram zu posten, nur weil mir gerade danach ist.
> 
> 
> Ich find das ganz Ok; jetzt wo wir Papst sind,

Harhar, du etwa auch?  Ich dachte, ich w�r der einzige Papst...

Vielleicht sollte ich den Papst in meine sig setzen...

-- 
No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's 
consent. -- Abraham Lincoln
From: André Thieme
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <d4pf1r$slm$1@ulric.tng.de>
Ulrich Hobelmann schrieb:
> Matthias Buelow wrote:
> 
>> Ulrich Hobelmann wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Aber ich finde es ziemlich unh�flich, in ein englisches Forum einfach
>>> deutschen Kram zu posten, nur weil mir gerade danach ist.
>>
>>
>>
>> Ich find das ganz Ok; jetzt wo wir Papst sind,
> 
> 
> Harhar, du etwa auch?  Ich dachte, ich w�r der einzige Papst...
> 
> Vielleicht sollte ich den Papst in meine sig setzen...

Nun wo der Airbus fliegt sind wir vermutlich ab jetzt Flugzeug.


Andr�
--
From: ···············@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <1114738803.191704.318330@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
The bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this Realm of England.
  --from the 39 Articles, 1571
From: Joona I Palaste
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <d55hsc$jcn$1@oravannahka.helsinki.fi>
Ulrich Hobelmann <···········@web.de> scribbled the following
on comp.lang.c:
> I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified 
> otherwise, just because they developed first and because their 
> users speak English.  German newsgroups, for instance, are part of 
> the de.* hierarchy.  I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too.

> It's no restriction, just a convention.  It's like not going into 
> an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the 
> waiter/waitress for ordering food.

I'd think talking to a waiter/waitress for ordering food without going
to a restaurant first is a bit unusual, no matter what language you're
speaking in.

-- 
/-- Joona Palaste (·······@cc.helsinki.fi) ------------- Finland --------\
\-------------------------------------------------------- rules! --------/
"I will never display my bum in public again."
   - Homer Simpson
From: Ulrich Hobelmann
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <3dn16lF6tdid6U1@individual.net>
Joona I Palaste wrote:
> Ulrich Hobelmann <···········@web.de> scribbled the following
> on comp.lang.c:
> 
>>I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified 
>>otherwise, just because they developed first and because their 
>>users speak English.  German newsgroups, for instance, are part of 
>>the de.* hierarchy.  I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too.
> 
> 
>>It's no restriction, just a convention.  It's like not going into 
>>an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the 
>>waiter/waitress for ordering food.
> 
> 
> I'd think talking to a waiter/waitress for ordering food without going
> to a restaurant first is a bit unusual, no matter what language you're
> speaking in.

No, I meant the convention is, "not (going ... and ordering in 
Chinese ...)".

-- 
No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's 
consent. -- Abraham Lincoln
From: Joona I Palaste
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <d55j1q$jva$1@oravannahka.helsinki.fi>
Ulrich Hobelmann <···········@web.de> scribbled the following
on comp.lang.c:
> Joona I Palaste wrote:
>> Ulrich Hobelmann <···········@web.de> scribbled the following
>> on comp.lang.c:
>> 
>>>I think the standard for NGs is to be English, unless specified 
>>>otherwise, just because they developed first and because their 
>>>users speak English.  German newsgroups, for instance, are part of 
>>>the de.* hierarchy.  I strongly suspect there are Chinese NGs, too.
>> 
>>>It's no restriction, just a convention.  It's like not going into 
>>>an English-speaking restaurant and talking Chinese to the 
>>>waiter/waitress for ordering food.
>> 
>> 
>> I'd think talking to a waiter/waitress for ordering food without going
>> to a restaurant first is a bit unusual, no matter what language you're
>> speaking in.

> No, I meant the convention is, "not (going ... and ordering in 
> Chinese ...)".

Oh, right. I read it as "(not going ...) and (ordering in Chinese ...)".
One of the wonders of ambiguiety in natural languages.

-- 
/-- Joona Palaste (·······@cc.helsinki.fi) ------------- Finland --------\
\-------------------------------------------------------- rules! --------/
"You have moved your mouse, for these changes to take effect you must shut down
and restart your computer. Do you want to restart your computer now?"
   - Karri Kalpio
From: Mark McIntyre
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <uv4d7110683kvr2vkom3bn7k7fb3qjfm45@4ax.com>
On 2 May 2005 16:04:10 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Joona I Palaste
<·······@cc.helsinki.fi> wrote:

>One of the wonders of ambiguiety in natural languages.

man eating tiger, anyone? 

-- 
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
From: Sunnan
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <aCVbe.22758$d5.167529@newsb.telia.net>
Chris McDonald wrote:
> Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
> From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).
> 

.i jimte mu'i lenu lo skamysnu pe lo bangu poi ke'a cu frica lei glico 
ku'o cu zasti
From: ············@gmail.com
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <1115049719.706219.282720@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
Sunnan wrote:
> Chris McDonald wrote:
> > Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
> > From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).
> >
>
> .i jimte mu'i lenu lo skamysnu pe lo bangu poi ke'a cu frica lei
glico 
> ku'o cu zasti

Lojban should be banned, of course.
From: Sunnan
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <oZzde.23178$d5.168954@newsb.telia.net>
············@gmail.com wrote:
> Sunnan wrote:
> 
>>Chris McDonald wrote:
>>
>>>Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
>>>From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).
>>>
>>
>>.i jimte mu'i lenu lo skamysnu pe lo bangu poi ke'a cu frica lei
> 
> glico 
> 
>>ku'o cu zasti
> 
> 
> Lojban should be banned, of course.
> 

.iecaizo'o
From: Richard Bos
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <42772455.608604005@news.xs4all.nl>
Sunnan <······@handgranat.org> wrote:

> ············@gmail.com wrote:
> > Sunnan wrote:
> > 
> >>Chris McDonald wrote:
> >>
> >>>Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
> >>>From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).
> >>
> >>.i jimte mu'i lenu lo skamysnu pe lo bangu poi ke'a cu frica lei
> > 
> > glico 
> > 
> >>ku'o cu zasti
> > 
> > Lojban should be banned, of course.
> 
> .iecaizo'o

All languages in which a full stop is anything other than punctuation
(i.e., in which they can be part of a word) are evil, and should be
banned. This goes for both natural, fictional human, and computer
languages (e.g., some Basics).

Richard
From: GuyBrush Treepwood
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <pan.2005.05.03.09.08.11.386536@hotmail.com>
On Tue, 03 May 2005 07:20:04 +0000, Richard Bos wrote:
> 
> All languages in which a full stop is anything other than punctuation
> (i.e., in which they can be part of a word) are evil, and should be
> banned. This goes for both natural, fictional human, and computer
> languages (e.g., some Basics).

Sending methods to objects? e.g.  foo.bar()

-- 
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, 
you'll have to ram them down people's throats."
	-- Howard Aiken
 
From: Richard Bos
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <42774109.615953870@news.xs4all.nl>
GuyBrush Treepwood <·······@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 03 May 2005 07:20:04 +0000, Richard Bos wrote:
> > 
> > All languages in which a full stop is anything other than punctuation
> > (i.e., in which they can be part of a word) are evil, and should be
> > banned. This goes for both natural, fictional human, and computer
> > languages (e.g., some Basics).
> 
> Sending methods to objects? e.g.  foo.bar()

All languages in which you can send methods to objects are evil, too :-P
But no, I consider that to be punctuation: separating the word "foo"
from the word "bar". In at least a couple of kinds of MS Basic, you
could write this.is.a.single.variable.name and it would in fact refer to
a single variable, not to parts of a structure.

Richard
From: Matthias Buelow
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <86zmvctjss.fsf@drjekyll.mkbuelow.net>
···@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) writes:

>All languages in which you can send methods to objects are evil, too :-P
>But no, I consider that to be punctuation: separating the word "foo"
>from the word "bar". In at least a couple of kinds of MS Basic, you
>could write this.is.a.single.variable.name and it would in fact refer to
>a single variable, not to parts of a structure.

like...

>  (define this.is.a.single.variable.name 'hello.richard-boos)
; no values returned
> this.is.a.single.variable.name
'hello.richard-boos
> 

;-)

mkb.

[Of course we all know Scheme and Lisp are evil.. *cackling-maniacally*]
From: Sunnan
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <vkKde.136266$dP1.480483@newsc.telia.net>
Richard Bos wrote:
>>.iecaizo'o
> 
> 
> All languages in which a full stop is anything other than punctuation
> (i.e., in which they can be part of a word) are evil, and should be
> banned.

In Scheme you can use the period sign in identifyers:

(define this.is.unusual 4)
this.is.unusual
=> 4

But I've never seen this in practice. I don't see where the evilness 
comes from.

In Lojban a full stop is punctuation - meaning a small pause when 
speaking - it's just that this punctuation is used differently than in 
English. I wouldn't call it "part of words".

.e'anaizo'o mi cu tolcru.zo'o le lojbo lenu lo krinu cu drata
From: Anton van Straaten
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <Z9Lde.1360$Yg4.672@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com>
Richard Bos wrote:
> Sunnan <······@handgranat.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>>············@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>Sunnan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Chris McDonald wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
>>>>
>>>>>From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).
>>>>
>>>>.i jimte mu'i lenu lo skamysnu pe lo bangu poi ke'a cu frica lei
>>>
>>>glico 
>>>
>>>
>>>>ku'o cu zasti
>>>
>>>Lojban should be banned, of course.
>>
>>.iecaizo'o
> 
> 
> All languages in which a full stop is anything other than punctuation
> (i.e., in which they can be part of a word) are evil, and should be
> banned. This goes for both natural, fictional human, and computer
> languages (e.g., some Basics).

Who can disagree with that?  However, no languages actually do this. 
They use periods, or even dots, instead.  While these may look the same 
as a "full stop" to the untrained eye, they can be distinguished by 
their lack of evilness when used in suspiciously un-punctuation-like 
ways.  In addition, only full stops have a British accent (usually 
Gloucestershire).

Anton
From: Martin Ambuhl
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <5BYbe.644$pe3.175@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Chris McDonald wrote:
> Martin Ambuhl <·······@earthlink.net> writes:
> 
> 
>>Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage 
>>newsgroups?
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
> From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).
> 

What are you on about?  "English usage newsgroups" are about English 
usage.  The point, which you don't seem to understand, is that he posts 
just as inappropriately to natural language newsgroups as he does to 
computer language newsgroups.
From: Jeffrey Cunningham
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <pan.2005.05.09.05.19.36.302838@cunningham.net>
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:17:21 +0000, Martin Ambuhl wrote:

> Chris McDonald wrote:
>> Martin Ambuhl <·······@earthlink.net> writes:
>> 
>> 
>>>Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage 
>>>newsgroups?

Maybe he's writing about english usage in Chinese? 
(I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt :-}

-jeff
From: Martin Ambuhl
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <7GYbe.646$pe3.72@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Chris McDonald wrote:
> Martin Ambuhl <·······@earthlink.net> writes:
> 
> 
>>Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage 
>>newsgroups?
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
> From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).
> 

It seems all the other responses are from people who share your 
inability to read.  Nowhere do I suggest that any of the comp.lang.* 
newsgroups are restricted to English.  Just as he posts inappropriately 
to comp.lang.* newsgroups, he post inappropriately to -- follow the 
bouncing ball -- English usage newsgroups, such as alt.usage.english and 
alt.english.usage.  Damned right that English usage newsgroups are about 
English usage.  Jeez.
From: Chris McDonald
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <d4plbl$ip0$1@enyo.uwa.edu.au>
Martin Ambuhl <·······@earthlink.net> writes:

>Chris McDonald wrote:
>> Martin Ambuhl <·······@earthlink.net> writes:
>> 
>>>Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage 
>>>newsgroups?
>> 
>> 
>> Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
>> From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).
>> 

>It seems all the other responses are from people who share your 
>inability to read.  Nowhere do I suggest that any of the comp.lang.* 
>newsgroups are restricted to English.  Just as he posts inappropriately 
>to comp.lang.* newsgroups, he post inappropriately to -- follow the 
>bouncing ball -- English usage newsgroups, such as alt.usage.english and 
>alt.english.usage.  Damned right that English usage newsgroups are about 
>English usage.  Jeez.


Or you could get off your high horse, and explain your need to state
"(in Chinese characters)".  Yes, inappropriate, we've all agreed on that.
Get over him;  we have,

-- 
Chris.
From: Mark McIntyre
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <rkc271lhf0a5k5ltusdv9hjhtltjvgsafi@4ax.com>
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:22:43 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Martin Ambuhl
<·······@earthlink.net> wrote:

>Chris McDonald wrote:
>> Martin Ambuhl <·······@earthlink.net> writes:
>> 
>> 
>>>Why does he post Chinese poetry (in Chinese characters) to English usage 
>>>newsgroups?
>> 
>> Why do you believe that these newsgroups are restricted to English?
>> From where comes the restriction?  (and it obviously doesn't work).
>
>It seems all the other responses are from people who share your 
>inability to read.  

Well, I was answering Chris' question, not commenting on what you
said, but its a fair point. 

And posting chinese poetry in chinese to a newsgroup specialising in
usage of english is incredibly dumb, incredibly rude, or both.

-- 
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>
From: Keith Thompson
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <lnfyxch6g2.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
"Xah Lee" <···@xahlee.org> writes:
> The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
>
> 20050222
>
> Computing Folks of the industry:
>
> please spread the debunking of the truncating line business of the
> fucking unix-loving fuckheads, as outlines here:
[snip]

Thank you for putting the abusive language near the top of your post,
so we know right away to ignore anything else you might have to say.

Note followups.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ·····@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center             <*>  <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this.
From: Raymond Wiker
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <86y8b4bjul.fsf@raw.grenland.fast.no>
Keith Thompson <·····@mib.org> writes:

> "Xah Lee" <···@xahlee.org> writes:
>> The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
>>
>> 20050222
>>
>> Computing Folks of the industry:
>>
>> please spread the debunking of the truncating line business of the
>> fucking unix-loving fuckheads, as outlines here:
> [snip]
>
> Thank you for putting the abusive language near the top of your post,
> so we know right away to ignore anything else you might have to say.
>
> Note followups.

        You don't even have to read the top of the message; 
'From: "Xah Leeh"' is enough to flag the message as ignorable.

-- 
Raymond Wiker                        Mail:  ·············@fast.no
Senior Software Engineer             Web:   http://www.fast.no/
Fast Search & Transfer ASA           Phone: +47 23 01 11 60
P.O. Box 1677 Vika                   Fax:   +47 35 54 87 99
NO-0120 Oslo, NORWAY                 Mob:   +47 48 01 11 60
From: Jeffrey Cunningham
Subject: Re: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <pan.2005.05.09.05.26.54.686424@cunningham.net>
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:07:29 +0000, Garry Hodgson wrote:

> Raymond Wiker <·············@fast.no> wrote:
> 
>>         You don't even have to read the top of the message; 
>> 'From: "Xah Leeh"' is enough to flag the message as ignorable.
> 
> you can optimize by putting this in your spam filter.
> 

Yeah, but when I get really bored and am too tired to work, there's
nothing quite like a good laugh reading a Xah Lee thread. He seems to
inspire the wits. 

-jeff cunningham
From: Oliver Bandel
Subject: Re: The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
Date: 
Message-ID: <1115681280.732962@elch.in-berlin.de>
Xah Lee wrote:
> The Harm of hard-wrapping Lines
> 
> 20050222
> 
> Computing Folks of the industry:
> 
> please spread the debunking of the truncating line business of the
> fucking unix-loving fuckheads, as outlines here:
> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/truncate_line.html
> 
> if this myth-debunking is known widely enough, there wouldn't be any


EOL ("\n") is like <p></p> or <br>

but it has a different syntax.

So it's logical too.

Ciao,
    Oliver
comp.lang.lisp / 2005 / apr