Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!noris.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-ID: <9724452.FQnffsY6ru@PointedEars.de> From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Reply-To: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Organization: PointedEars Software (PES) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 16:28:48 +0200 User-Agent: KNode/4.10.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Face: %i>XG-yXR'\"2P/C_aO%~;2o~?g0pPKmbOw^=NT`tprDEf++D.m7"}HW6.#=U:?2GGctkL,f89@H46O$ASoW&?s}.k+&. <1639100.PjNAD8PV0k@PointedEars.de> <8f4997a5-cb1c-4d4c-961e-c88226531c6d@cl9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <2307387.pZyV4EZjM8@PointedEars.de> <7bbd3b78-c201-4ac4-98b6-77a3d270c807@fv8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <2788472.6QvGpzPONO@PointedEars.de> <5260436.L7RB4VL119@PointedEars.de> <025995e5-77c4-42e0-9c2d-60607ed970e9@2g2000yqr.googlegroups.com> <3158186.8TiyjIphOr@PointedEars.de> <682ad042-58a6-47da-9540-76d8b09f5592@l5g2000vbn.googlegroups.com> <10880935.qUOYKYk0ac@PointedEars.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Lines: 90 NNTP-Posting-Date: 29 May 2013 16:29:37 CEST NNTP-Posting-Host: 1789edff.newsspool1.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=35NdB;d^jlO02Sh8E_NfIAic==]BZ:afN4Fo<]lROoRAnkgeX?EC@@@KV1GJ:PY58ADZm8W4\YJNLb@mF9jNikdE7a5\<`>]gfNDA?11Wb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> Scott Sauyet wrote: >>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>>> The point is that you continue to fail to differentiate between >>>> >>>> A) an expression >>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> B) the string representation of the function that contains it. >>> >>> No, as I've demonstrated repeatedly, I understand the difference. >> >>> However, even though the two programs I supplied differ only in one >>> equivalent expression, they have different behavior. >>> >>> Stipulating the definition of equivalent expressions as you've >>> presented it, if we define Document A as the one residing at >>> >>> >>> >>> and Document B as the one residing at >> >>> http://scott.sauyet.com/Javascript/Demo/2013-05-27b/> >> >> [libel] This was not libel. *The record shows* that it *is* typical for you to fail to differentiate between the argument and the person making it. One could consider your using my name in this context libel, but I do not intend to descend to your niveau of argumentation and let you beat me with experience there. >>> The argument, in excruciating detail, proceeds as follows: >> >>> 1. Document A and Document B differ only on line 9. >>> 2. The difference on line 9 starts at column 29. >>> 3. That difference falls inside a client-side program spanning lines >>> 7 - 18. These two distinct programs we will label Program A >>> and Program B, respectively. >>> 4. The difference from Program A to Program B can be described as >>> the deletion of the characters "+!1" and the insertion of the >>> character "0". >>> 5. At character 29 of line 9, an expression is allowable. >>> 6. "+!1" is a legal expression. >>> 7. "0" is a legal expression. >>> 8. "+!1" and "0" are equivalent expressions. >>> 9. Hence Program A and Program B differ only in the substitution of >>> equivalent expressions. >>> 10. Loading Document A and Document B into Chrome 27.0.1453.94 (*) >>> yield differing output. >>> 11. That differing output is the result of the differences between >>> Program A and Program B. >>> 12. Therefore, two programs that differ only in the substitution of >>> equivalent expressions can yield differing output. >> >>> (*) Feel free to substitute another modern browser. >> >>> Can you accept this argument >> >> No (but that is not the reason why I also reject your later ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> interpretation). ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>> If not, which is the first step you reject? >> >> 10. > > In other words, you deny that "Loading Document A and Document B into > Chrome 27.0.1453.94 yield differing output." No. And as long as you cannot see that even though I made it perfectly clear, there really is nothing else to discuss. Apparently you are challenged by even the slightest deviation from the answer that you expect − calling those responses “irrelevant” even though they are not. So the only chance to resolve this in a civilized manner (and save me precious free time no less) that I can see at this point is to take it step by step: No, I do not deny that "Loading Document A and Document B into Chrome 27.0.1453.94 yield differing output." -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.