Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25761

Re: Why “new”?

From	Lew <lew@lewscanon.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: Why “new”?
Date	2011-02-09 10:02 -0800
Organization	http://groups.google.com
Message-ID	<e7a1a5dc-dda1-496c-8fa4-d7431b646d3c@i39g2000prd.googlegroups.com> (permalink)
References	(16 earlier) <4d515dba$1@news.x-privat.org> <4d521319$0$23758$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <slrnil53lk.nej.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <iiu4br$1q1$1@news.albasani.net> <slrnil5br5.nej.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at>

Show all headers | View raw

On Feb 9, 10:14 am, Andreas Leitgeb <a...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at>
wrote:
> Lew <no...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> >>> [someone] tried the lame rationale that:
> >>>> 2. Asking is still quicker than messing around trying multiple google
> >>>>      queries.
> >> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> >>> How long time did it take from you posted the question to you got an
> >>> answer?
> > Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
> >> Now, really, Arne, you could have tried to google, instead of asking
> >> this question! ;)
> >> (just kidding - I know it was a rhetorical one)
> > And inherently not amenable to search engine research.
>
> You're applying the same rationale that you criticized. (joke?)

Bullshit.  You have no evidence for that.

> [someone] assumed, that a query for "j" alone would be inherently
> not amenable. Ok, he was wrong with his assumption, but did *you*
> try (e.g. google groups), before claiming in-amenability?

Yes, I did, contrary to your unfounded assertion that I didn't.  Not
that it's necessary - to date, search engines to not let the general
public search for other individual's search patterns.  But you knew
that already, of course, since you have used search engines.

What I don't understand is your assumption that I didn't check.  I can
understand a question, but not "You're applying the same rational that
you criticized."  Of *course* I checked!

Sheesh!

--
Lew

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-08 23:08 -0500
  Re: Why “new”? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-09 08:21 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-02-09 15:14 +0000
      Re: Why “new”? Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-09 10:02 -0800
  Re: Why “new”? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-02-09 12:55 +0000

csiph-web