Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!news.mixmin.net!newsfeed.utanet.at!newscore.univie.ac.at!aconews-feed.univie.ac.at!aconews.univie.ac.at!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
From: Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at>
Subject: Re: Java left shift and right shift operators.
References: <295e16b3-2ed8-4529-bfb0-1cc26ed93ad6@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com> <1b558330-ae94-4e4e-9922-a9aeb63eaf37@d19g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <ip6ak8$6ie$1@dont-email.me> <44bbc323-c260-4169-ab2a-11b95d9e73e8@34g2000pru.googlegroups.com> <ip74ec$u1j$1@news.albasani.net> <slrnirelfv.phi.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <ip84re$b6v$1@news.albasani.net>
Reply-To: avl@logic.at
User-Agent: slrn/pre0.9.9-111 (Linux)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <slrnirffji.phi.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at>
Date: 27 Apr 2011 06:57:54 GMT
Lines: 38
NNTP-Posting-Host: gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
X-Trace: 1303887474 tunews.univie.ac.at 60386 128.130.175.3
X-Complaints-To: abuse@tuwien.ac.at
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:3294

Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> On 04/26/2011 07:32 PM, Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
>> Lew<noone@lewscanon.com>  wrote:
>>> Sanny, please attribute your citations.
>>> Sanny wrote: [sic*]
>>>>>>> Is there [...]
>>> Eric Sosman wrote: [sic*]
>>>>> Let me [...]
>>> Sanny wrote:
>>>> I didnt [...]
>> *: Two of three attributions (intendly?) wrongly indented.
>> Lew, please indent attributions with the correct number of ">"s.
> Obviously you neglected to see how far back these quotes came.  The 
> indentations were correct.  Check again.

I said they were wrongly *indented*, not that they were wrongly placed.

As I explained already once, a snippet like this:

   Eric Sosman wrote:
   >> Let me [...]

does NOT say, that the words "Let me" were Eric's, but instead implies,
that Eric Sosman had quoted someone who wrote those words, because there
are two levels difference in indentation.

Had you instead written:
   > Eric Sosman wrote:
   >> Let me [...]
it would have been correct and remained clear in further followups,
each adding another ">" infront of all the lines (except the new
initial attribution line).

PS: there was another [sic] in my post, though: the word "intendedly" 
  had unnoticedly lost one of its "ed"s.

PPS: The higher the need to strictly clarify who wrote what, the lower 
  really the use of contributing to that particular subthread. :-)