[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: string> missing?

From: Nick Andryshak
Subject: Re: string> missing?
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2015 16:53:03 -0400

Jay Belanger writes:

> In what way is any one of the answers the least bit unreasonable?

Since you asked:

> Because they do.

"Because they do" is a non-answer.

> The cause is lost in history.


> No, I don't agree.

I really don't understand why Eli would say something like this. I think
it contradicts his work.

> That's exactly the point: there's no need to apply the same logic to
> both cases.

This makes no sense: I'm sure many people have seen the function
'string<' and assumed that there exists a counterpart 'string>'. I think
that this is a reasonable assumption to make. In fact, that's probably
why we're having this (rather silly) discussion in the first place.

- Nick

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]