Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #3028

OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search)

Show all headers | View raw

In article <inielt$uok$1@news.albasani.net>, Lew  <noone@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> Mike Schilling wrote:
> > Fair point. This was simpler before generics, when the Comparator could accept
> > either K's [sic] or T's [sic] :-)

"[sic]"?  

My understanding is that while it's less common than it used to be
to form the plurals of multiletter acronyms [*] with apostrophes
(e.g., "CDs" rather than "CD's"), apostrophes are still advised
for forming plurals of single letters, to avoid ambiguity in the
case of A and I (and possibly some others I'm not thinking of).

Can you cite any authoritative recommendation for leaving out
the apostrophes here?

[*] Or initialisms, for the pedantic?

[ snip ]

> In the simpler way, you compare Ts and Ks willy-nilly, without really saying 
> so.  Sure it works, but it's hidden.

[ snip ]

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

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

Thread

Re: Binary Search Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-04-02 22:00 +1300
  Re: Binary Search Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-02 05:07 -0500
    Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 07:59 -0700
      Re: Binary Search Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-02 10:37 -0500
        Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 08:57 -0700
          Re: Binary Search Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-04-03 12:40 +1200
  Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 07:58 -0700
    Re: Binary Search Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-02 11:11 -0400
      Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 08:58 -0700
    Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 00:11 +0100
      Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 16:52 -0700
        Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 18:50 +0100
          Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-03 12:01 -0700
            Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 22:39 +0100
              Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-03 16:37 -0700
                Re: Binary Search Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-06 15:24 -0400
                OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> - 2011-04-11 13:53 +0000
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 11:45 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-11 14:11 -0500
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 13:48 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-11 22:16 +0100
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 17:54 -0400
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-11 23:35 +0100
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-11 21:41 -0500
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> - 2011-04-14 10:11 +0000
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Jerry Gerrone <scuzwalla@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 20:12 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-04-26 22:53 +0100
      Re: Binary Search Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-04-05 16:01 +0100

csiph-web