--JP+T4n/bALQSJXh8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 07:26:11AM +0900, David Masover wrote:
>=20
> Why am I still feeding this troll?

I think it's because, like me, you may still not be 100% certain whether
he's a troll or just thick-headedly incapable of grasping your argument.


>=20
> The only thing you don't seem to have time for is forming a logical=20
> argument.

=2E . . or understanding one (yours).


>=20
> Ah. So when it's flexibility you like, it's a strength. When it's=20
> flexibility you don't like, it's "anarchy". Got it.

I just quoted this because it bears repeating, in case he didn't notice
it sufficiently well the first time.


>=20
> I have never heard it used to mean that, in computer science or otherwise.
>=20
> It means, roughly, neither dependent nor mutually exclusive -- if two=20
> things are orthogonal, they have no side effects on each other.
>=20
> For example, object oriented programming is orthogonal to regular=20
> expressions. You can have a language with rich regex support and no OO,=
=20
> or, conversely, a language with rich OO and no builtin regex support. Or=
=20
> you can have a language with both -- in which case, you can probably=20
> make large changes to the object system without affecting regexes, and=20
> vice versa.
>=20
> Within an object system, I might call two modules "orthogonal" if I can=
=20
> include one, the other, neither, or both into my class without any=20
> problems -- and, specifically, if I can include both without one=20
> affecting the other. I believe Comparable and Enumerable are orthogonal=
=20
> in that way.
>=20
> Further reading:
>=20
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthogonality#Computer_science
>=20
> I think you'll probably find that you are the only person on this forum=
=20
> using "orthogonal" to mean "opposite", because it does not. In fact, you=
=20
> will not find "opposite" on that page -- despite wildly different=20
> definitions in each of the _eight_ fields mentioned.

Excellent explanation.  Thank you for expanding upon my point so clearly.

--=20
Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
Quoth Anonymous: "Why do we never have time to do it right, but always
have time to do it over?"

--JP+T4n/bALQSJXh8
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmV0EAACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKUWAACcC1LggFIDWmX9/dhFODOgMgRs
2cIAoJpQ61RX/H8iQXyAU+vbAKUhfxQ4
=90Qj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--JP+T4n/bALQSJXh8--