Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.php > #9264 > unrolled thread
| Started by | fred <email@address.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-05-12 15:22 +0100 |
| Last post | 2013-05-15 13:11 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 141 — 20 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.php
bug in is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-12 15:22 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Salvatore <sal@yojimbo.hack.invalid> - 2013-05-12 15:31 +0000
Re: bug in is_numeric Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-12 17:55 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-12 17:58 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas Mlynarczyk <thomas@mlynarczyk-webdesign.de> - 2013-05-12 18:06 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-12 16:24 +0000
Re: bug in is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-12 18:41 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2013-05-13 13:50 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-13 14:58 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-13 10:11 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-13 15:15 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2013-05-13 17:29 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2013-05-13 19:55 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Richard Yates <richard@yatesguitar.com> - 2013-05-14 06:41 -0700
Re: bug in is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-14 21:43 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-14 23:01 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-15 05:48 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-15 06:11 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 18:36 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-15 15:19 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-15 20:23 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-15 20:49 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-15 21:58 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-15 22:20 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-15 22:42 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas Mlynarczyk <thomas@mlynarczyk-webdesign.de> - 2013-05-15 23:53 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-16 00:29 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-16 00:40 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-16 05:00 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 18:16 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-17 00:45 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 22:52 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-17 18:33 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-17 20:39 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-17 23:45 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-18 14:47 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-15 20:57 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-16 00:09 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-17 01:17 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-16 20:30 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-18 14:51 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 10:07 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-18 11:56 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 14:32 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-18 22:24 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 17:01 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-18 21:58 +0000
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 19:21 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-19 02:22 +0000
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 22:41 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 05:28 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 09:42 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:42 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 14:39 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-21 01:01 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-21 05:59 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-19 07:49 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 05:31 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-19 12:39 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 09:43 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:52 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 14:42 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-21 01:03 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-21 06:00 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:45 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 05:27 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 09:45 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:37 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 14:43 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-21 00:59 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-21 06:02 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-18 17:08 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-18 23:58 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 19:22 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-18 17:11 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 19:23 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 05:35 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 09:46 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:23 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 14:44 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-21 00:54 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-21 06:03 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-23 15:38 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-06-01 17:36 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-06-01 14:54 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-06-05 15:25 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-06-05 10:34 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-06-05 17:02 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-06-05 12:30 -0400
OT: What you say is not always what you mean (was: Re: bug in is_numeric) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-06-05 20:20 +0200
Re: OT: What you say is not always what you mean Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-06-05 14:40 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-18 21:51 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-18 17:13 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-19 00:49 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 05:24 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-19 12:40 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-19 12:43 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:29 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-18 14:53 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 18:41 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-05-13 08:35 -0700
Re: bug in is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-13 20:26 +0000
Re: bug in is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-13 20:15 +0000
Re: bug in is_numeric Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2013-05-12 13:03 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-12 18:03 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-12 18:34 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-12 19:40 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-12 21:51 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-12 11:47 -0500
Re: bug in is_numeric Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-12 18:56 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas Mlynarczyk <thomas@mlynarczyk-webdesign.de> - 2013-05-12 19:05 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-12 19:38 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-12 19:46 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-12 14:11 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-12 20:39 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-12 16:51 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-13 01:27 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-12 20:35 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-13 11:07 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-13 09:02 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-13 16:57 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-13 17:10 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-13 13:52 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-13 20:28 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 18:28 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-17 00:33 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 22:34 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-18 10:28 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-18 08:00 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-18 14:18 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-05-18 13:20 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 08:47 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-18 14:05 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 10:16 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-18 16:14 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-05-14 10:34 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-14 14:47 +0100
Re: bug in is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-14 14:54 +0000
Re: bug in is_numeric Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-05-15 08:05 +0200
Re: bug in is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-15 06:27 -0400
Re: bug in is_numeric Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2013-05-15 13:11 +0200
Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-21 00:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <r_Dmt.5045$T62.1741@newsfe08.iad> |
| In reply to | #9472 |
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message news:knb6be$r05$3@dont-email.me... >I never claimed I was a victim. You're the only one who has brought that >subject up. Yeah, you did - when you said you didn't go along willingly, even though you were going along. That you pretended not to understand that isn't just an intellectual shortcoming; it's a character flaw.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-21 06:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <knfgii$b58$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9484 |
On 5/21/2013 1:54 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote: > "Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message news:knb6be$r05$3@dont-email.me... > >> I never claimed I was a victim. You're the only one who has brought >> that subject up. > > Yeah, you did - when you said you didn't go along willingly, even though > you were going along. > That you pretended not to understand that isn't just an intellectual > shortcoming; it's a character flaw. > Show me EXACTLY where I said "I didn't go along willingly". But you can't. Trolls make all kinds of claims they can't substantiate. They also start with the ad hominem attacks. Who gave you the degree in psychology? Oh, it's just transference again. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fred <email@address.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-23 15:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.2c083a50b0bf73cd9896b6@news.virginmedia.com> |
| In reply to | #9494 |
In article <knfgii$b58$4@dont-email.me>, jstucklex@attglobal.net says... > > On 5/21/2013 1:54 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote: > > "Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message news:knb6be$r05$3@dont-email.me... > > > >> I never claimed I was a victim. You're the only one who has brought ROFL Yes it seems my first assumption was the correct one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-01 17:36 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <51AA150A.5050401@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9494 |
Jerry Stuckle, 2013-05-21 12:03: > On 5/21/2013 1:54 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote: >> "Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message news:knb6be$r05$3@dont-email.me... >> >>> I never claimed I was a victim. You're the only one who has brought >>> that subject up. >> >> Yeah, you did - when you said you didn't go along willingly, even though >> you were going along. >> That you pretended not to understand that isn't just an intellectual >> shortcoming; it's a character flaw. >> > > Show me EXACTLY where I said "I didn't go along willingly". But you > can't. Trolls make all kinds of claims they can't substantiate. In <knaksf$oi1$4@dont-email.me> you wrote: "No, I did not go along willingly with Pointed Head's hijacking of the thread." But you will tell us of course, that "I did not go along willingly" is something totally different to "I didn't go along willingly" ;-) -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-01 14:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kodfoa$268$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9735 |
On 6/1/2013 11:36 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Jerry Stuckle, 2013-05-21 12:03: > >> On 5/21/2013 1:54 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote: >>> "Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message news:knb6be$r05$3@dont-email.me... >>> >>>> I never claimed I was a victim. You're the only one who has brought >>>> that subject up. >>> >>> Yeah, you did - when you said you didn't go along willingly, even though >>> you were going along. >>> That you pretended not to understand that isn't just an intellectual >>> shortcoming; it's a character flaw. >>> >> >> Show me EXACTLY where I said "I didn't go along willingly". But you >> can't. Trolls make all kinds of claims they can't substantiate. > > In <knaksf$oi1$4@dont-email.me> you wrote: > > "No, I did not go along willingly with Pointed Head's hijacking of the > thread." > > But you will tell us of course, that "I did not go along willingly" is > something totally different to "I didn't go along willingly" ;-) > > > > No, I didn't go along willingly with the hijacking. Completely different than what you claimed. Maybe you should learn English better. But then trolls never get things right. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-05 15:25 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <51AF3C5C.60607@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9737 |
Am 01.06.2013 20:54, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: > On 6/1/2013 11:36 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-05-21 12:03: >> >>> On 5/21/2013 1:54 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote: >>>> "Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message news:knb6be$r05$3@dont-email.me... >>>> >>>>> I never claimed I was a victim. You're the only one who has brought >>>>> that subject up. >>>> >>>> Yeah, you did - when you said you didn't go along willingly, even though >>>> you were going along. >>>> That you pretended not to understand that isn't just an intellectual >>>> shortcoming; it's a character flaw. >>>> >>> >>> Show me EXACTLY where I said "I didn't go along willingly". But you >>> can't. Trolls make all kinds of claims they can't substantiate. >> >> In <knaksf$oi1$4@dont-email.me> you wrote: >> >> "No, I did not go along willingly with Pointed Head's hijacking of the >> thread." >> >> But you will tell us of course, that "I did not go along willingly" is >> something totally different to "I didn't go along willingly" ;-) >> >> >> >> > > No, I didn't go along willingly with the hijacking. Completely > different than what you claimed. You wrote that you "did not go along willingly with the hijacking" - everybody can read this in your posting. On the other hand you say that you did NOT say "i did not go along willingly"... very confusing. > Maybe you should learn English better. LOL.... -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-05 10:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <koni1g$j35$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9766 |
On 6/5/2013 9:25 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Am 01.06.2013 20:54, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: > >> On 6/1/2013 11:36 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-05-21 12:03: >>> >>>> On 5/21/2013 1:54 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote: >>>>> "Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message news:knb6be$r05$3@dont-email.me... >>>>> >>>>>> I never claimed I was a victim. You're the only one who has brought >>>>>> that subject up. >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, you did - when you said you didn't go along willingly, even though >>>>> you were going along. >>>>> That you pretended not to understand that isn't just an intellectual >>>>> shortcoming; it's a character flaw. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Show me EXACTLY where I said "I didn't go along willingly". But you >>>> can't. Trolls make all kinds of claims they can't substantiate. >>> >>> In <knaksf$oi1$4@dont-email.me> you wrote: >>> >>> "No, I did not go along willingly with Pointed Head's hijacking of the >>> thread." >>> >>> But you will tell us of course, that "I did not go along willingly" is >>> something totally different to "I didn't go along willingly" ;-) >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> No, I didn't go along willingly with the hijacking. Completely >> different than what you claimed. > > You wrote that you "did not go along willingly with the hijacking" - > everybody can read this in your posting. On the other hand you say that > you did NOT say "i did not go along willingly"... very confusing. > Yep, meaning I did not support the hijacking of the thread. It did not mean I was "dragged along" or was a "victim". But then trolls always try to distort the truth. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-05 17:02 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <51AF5318.5020901@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9767 |
Am 05.06.2013 16:34, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: > On 6/5/2013 9:25 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >> Am 01.06.2013 20:54, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: >> >>> On 6/1/2013 11:36 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-05-21 12:03: >>>> >>>>> On 5/21/2013 1:54 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote: >>>>>> "Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message news:knb6be$r05$3@dont-email.me... >>>>>> >>>>>>> I never claimed I was a victim. You're the only one who has brought >>>>>>> that subject up. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, you did - when you said you didn't go along willingly, even though >>>>>> you were going along. >>>>>> That you pretended not to understand that isn't just an intellectual >>>>>> shortcoming; it's a character flaw. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Show me EXACTLY where I said "I didn't go along willingly". But you >>>>> can't. Trolls make all kinds of claims they can't substantiate. >>>> >>>> In <knaksf$oi1$4@dont-email.me> you wrote: >>>> >>>> "No, I did not go along willingly with Pointed Head's hijacking of the >>>> thread." >>>> >>>> But you will tell us of course, that "I did not go along willingly" is >>>> something totally different to "I didn't go along willingly" ;-) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> No, I didn't go along willingly with the hijacking. Completely >>> different than what you claimed. >> >> You wrote that you "did not go along willingly with the hijacking" - >> everybody can read this in your posting. On the other hand you say that >> you did NOT say "i did not go along willingly"... very confusing. >> > > Yep, meaning I did not support the hijacking of the thread. It did not > mean I was "dragged along" or was a "victim". Thanks for the explanation. > But then trolls always try to distort the truth. I just pointed out the single sentence "I did not go along willingly" and your claim that you never said this very sentence: "Show me EXACTLY where I said "I didn't go along willingly". But you can't." Yes - one can. You *did* write this sentence. Just be careful what you claim before you call everybody else a troll just because they do not agree. And even your understanding of the meaning of the word "troll" is questionable. -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-05 12:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <konopu$s7e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9768 |
On 6/5/2013 11:02 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Am 05.06.2013 16:34, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: >> On 6/5/2013 9:25 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>> Am 01.06.2013 20:54, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: >>> >>>> On 6/1/2013 11:36 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-05-21 12:03: >>>>> >>>>>> On 5/21/2013 1:54 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote: >>>>>>> "Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message news:knb6be$r05$3@dont-email.me... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I never claimed I was a victim. You're the only one who has brought >>>>>>>> that subject up. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yeah, you did - when you said you didn't go along willingly, even though >>>>>>> you were going along. >>>>>>> That you pretended not to understand that isn't just an intellectual >>>>>>> shortcoming; it's a character flaw. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Show me EXACTLY where I said "I didn't go along willingly". But you >>>>>> can't. Trolls make all kinds of claims they can't substantiate. >>>>> >>>>> In <knaksf$oi1$4@dont-email.me> you wrote: >>>>> >>>>> "No, I did not go along willingly with Pointed Head's hijacking of the >>>>> thread." >>>>> >>>>> But you will tell us of course, that "I did not go along willingly" is >>>>> something totally different to "I didn't go along willingly" ;-) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> No, I didn't go along willingly with the hijacking. Completely >>>> different than what you claimed. >>> >>> You wrote that you "did not go along willingly with the hijacking" - >>> everybody can read this in your posting. On the other hand you say that >>> you did NOT say "i did not go along willingly"... very confusing. >>> >> >> Yep, meaning I did not support the hijacking of the thread. It did not >> mean I was "dragged along" or was a "victim". > > Thanks for the explanation. > >> But then trolls always try to distort the truth. > > I just pointed out the single sentence "I did not go along willingly" > and your claim that you never said this very sentence: > > "Show me EXACTLY where I said "I didn't go along willingly". But you > can't." > > Yes - one can. You *did* write this sentence. Just be careful what you > claim before you call everybody else a troll just because they do not > agree. And even your understanding of the meaning of the word "troll" is > questionable. > > Yes, but you twisted the meaning - as trolls do. And believe me - I know the meaning of "troll". You'll find it in the dictionary right under "Arno Welzel". -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-05 20:20 +0200 |
| Subject | OT: What you say is not always what you mean (was: Re: bug in is_numeric) |
| Message-ID | <51AF816F.80204@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9769 |
Jerry Stuckle, 2013-06-05 18:30: > On 6/5/2013 11:02 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: [...] >> Yes - one can. You *did* write this sentence. Just be careful what you >> claim before you call everybody else a troll just because they do not >> agree. And even your understanding of the meaning of the word "troll" is >> questionable. >> >> > > Yes, but you twisted the meaning - as trolls do. I did not say anything about meaning, I did not claim that you are a victim or anything else in this direction. I just falsified your claim that you did not say "I didn't go along willingly" a few posts earlier, since you call other people "troll", just because they misunderstand what you say. -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-05 14:40 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: OT: What you say is not always what you mean |
| Message-ID | <koo0df$bie$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9770 |
On 6/5/2013 2:20 PM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Jerry Stuckle, 2013-06-05 18:30: > >> On 6/5/2013 11:02 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: > [...] >>> Yes - one can. You *did* write this sentence. Just be careful what you >>> claim before you call everybody else a troll just because they do not >>> agree. And even your understanding of the meaning of the word "troll" is >>> questionable. >>> >>> >> >> Yes, but you twisted the meaning - as trolls do. > > I did not say anything about meaning, I did not claim that you are a > victim or anything else in this direction. > > I just falsified your claim that you did not say "I didn't go along > willingly" a few posts earlier, since you call other people "troll", > just because they misunderstand what you say. > > You forgot one part. I know the meaning of "troll". You'll find it in the dictionary right under "Arno Welzel". But then trolls never claim to twist meanings - even though they do so regularly. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-18 21:51 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <3010429.6D23Fo3XOK@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #9423 |
Sanders Kaufman wrote: > Usenet wasn't meant to be a discussion group at all - it was meant to be a > forum for uncensored reporting. > That's what the second N in NNTP stands for. > Threading is just an evolutionary remnant of it's SMTP heritage, and the > reason why Usenet devolved away from being a news forum. Utter nonsense. I wonder who is writing your textbooks. PointedEars -- > If you get a bunch of authors […] that state the same "best practices" > in any programming language, then you can bet who is wrong or right... Not with javascript. Nonsense propagates like wildfire in this field. -- Richard Cornford, comp.lang.javascript, 2011-11-14
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-18 17:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <S1Tlt.8870$MQ7.5711@newsfe18.iad> |
| In reply to | #9426 |
"Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn" wrote in message news:3010429.6D23Fo3XOK@PointedEars.de... >> Threading is just an evolutionary remnant of it's SMTP heritage, and the >> reason why Usenet devolved away from being a news forum. > Utter nonsense. I wonder who is writing your textbooks. It's okay for you not to believe the things you see. The world needs janitors.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-19 00:49 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1536024.cBPBjKTSvE@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #9432 |
Sanders Kaufman wrote: > "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn" wrote […] >>> Threading is just an evolutionary remnant of it's SMTP heritage, and the >>> reason why Usenet devolved away from being a news forum. >> >> Utter nonsense. I wonder who is writing your textbooks. > > It's okay for you not to believe the things you see. > The world needs janitors. Please read <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet> pp. and shut up until you have gotten a minimum clue of what you are talking about. Usenet was conceived in 1979 by two graduate studends and started out in 1980 at two U.S. universities as a discussion forum for scientists to exchange ideas. Initially Unix-to-Unix-CoPy (UUCP, conceived in 1979) was used, then NNTP (1986). SMTP came *after* Usenet was implemented, in 1982. PointedEars -- > If you get a bunch of authors […] that state the same "best practices" > in any programming language, then you can bet who is wrong or right... Not with javascript. Nonsense propagates like wildfire in this field. -- Richard Cornford, comp.lang.javascript, 2011-11-14
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-19 05:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mL1mt.2630$Ju6.1189@newsfe22.iad> |
| In reply to | #9433 |
"Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn" wrote in message news:1536024.cBPBjKTSvE@PointedEars.de... >Please read <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet> pp. and shut up until you >have gotten a minimum clue of what you are talking about. Usenet was >conceived in 1979 by two graduate studends and started out in 1980 at two >U.S. universities as a discussion forum for scientists to exchange ideas. >Initially Unix-to-Unix-CoPy (UUCP, conceived in 1979) was used, then NNTP >(1986). SMTP came *after* Usenet was implemented, in 1982. That's one version of the story - and a very abbreviated one at that. But it's still an awfully odd thing for you to throw a tantrum over. Have you considered medication or electro-shock therapy?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-19 12:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <4631447.XAOiFNHz4U@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #9441 |
Sanders Kaufman wrote: > "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn" wrote in message > news:1536024.cBPBjKTSvE@PointedEars.de... It's attribution _line_, not attribution novel. >> Please read <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet> pp. and shut up until >> you have gotten a minimum clue of what you are talking about. Usenet was >> conceived in 1979 by two graduate studen[t]s and started out in 1980 at two >> U.S. universities as a discussion forum for scientists to exchange ideas. >> Initially Unix-to-Unix-CoPy (UUCP, conceived in 1979) was used, then NNTP >> (1986). SMTP came *after* Usenet was implemented, in 1982. > > That's one version of the story - and a very abbreviated one at that. The UUCP bang path in your posting (and all other postings), which was transferred via NNTP to the news server that I am using – | Path: newsspool2.arcor-online.net!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!newsspool2.arcor- online.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!news.glorb.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds- media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!newsfe22.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail – is living proof that you have no clue what you are talking about. > But it's still an awfully odd thing for you to throw a tantrum over. > Have you considered medication or electro-shock therapy? Have you? *PLONK* & F'up2 where it belongs
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-19 12:43 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <knads3$t97$4@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #9446 |
On 19/05/13 11:40, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Sanders Kaufman wrote: > >> "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn" wrote in message >> news:1536024.cBPBjKTSvE@PointedEars.de... > It's attribution _line_, not attribution novel. > >>> Please read <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet> pp. and shut up until >>> you have gotten a minimum clue of what you are talking about. Usenet was >>> conceived in 1979 by two graduate studen[t]s and started out in 1980 at two >>> U.S. universities as a discussion forum for scientists to exchange ideas. >>> Initially Unix-to-Unix-CoPy (UUCP, conceived in 1979) was used, then NNTP >>> (1986). SMTP came *after* Usenet was implemented, in 1982. >> That's one version of the story - and a very abbreviated one at that. > The UUCP bang path in your posting (and all other postings), which was > transferred via NNTP to the news server that I am using – > > | Path: newsspool2.arcor-online.net!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!newsspool2.arcor- > online.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!news.glorb.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds- > media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!newsfe22.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail > > – is living proof that you have no clue what you are talking about. > >> But it's still an awfully odd thing for you to throw a tantrum over. >> Have you considered medication or electro-shock therapy? > Have you? > > *PLONK* & F'up2 where it belongs Sometimes you can be an excessively pedanatic net Nazi Thomas, but that doesn't mean you are not right. Which is why, unlike Stuckle. you are not in my killfile :-) -- Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-19 11:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <567mt.1857$u_4.428@newsfe09.iad> |
| In reply to | #9446 |
"Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn" wrote in message news:4631447.XAOiFNHz4U@PointedEars.de... >The UUCP bang path in your posting (and all other postings), which was >transferred via NNTP to the news server that I am using – >– is living proof that you have no clue what you are talking about. That's quite a tantrum. I especially like the part where you say that a message header is actually ALIVE. Either way, you're right to be ashamed to post such crap under your own name.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-18 14:53 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kn8if7$ock$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9420 |
On 05/18/2013 10:07 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > On 5/18/2013 8:51 AM, Christoph Becker wrote: >> Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>> No, but since it is unrelated to the OP's problem, it's nothing more >>> than thread hijacking - something Pointed Head is well known for, as I >>> said before. >>> >>> If Pointed Head wanted to bring it up, he should have started a new >>> thread. Or, better yet, reported it on the PHP bugs database, since >>> none of the PHP developers pay attention to this newsgroup. >> >> Does it really matter if the issue is pointed out in this thread or in a >> new thread with the subject "bug in is_numeric"? And does it matter who >> files a respective bug report? After all, we all benefit from being PHP >> as bug free/clearly documented as possible. >> > > Yes, it does. People looking through threads will not find this problem > if they look at the first couple of posts. And people looking at the > first couple of posts will have to sort through a huge amount of garbage > to figure out most of what is here is completely unrelated to the > original subject. > Of which I was inarguably part of... sorry about that. > Usenet has threads for a reason. And this is a perfect example why. > Maybe if Pointed Head weren't so caught up in criticizing everyone else > for what he perceives as egracious errors (like not using their real > name in their header) he could figure out how not to hijack others' > threads. > > -- Norman Registered Linux user #461062 -Have you been to www.php.net yet?-
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-05-16 18:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kn3n3u$jka$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9332 |
On 05/14/2013 11:01 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 5/14/2013 9:43 PM, SwissCheese wrote:
>> On 05/14/2013 09:41 AM, Richard Yates wrote:
>>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 15:15:06 +0100, fred <email@address.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <kmqs3c$e3s$1@dont-email.me>, jstucklex@attglobal.net
>>>> says...
>>>>> As others have shown, is_numeric() returns false in several versions
>>>>> of PHP.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have just typed in an exact copy of the test in my message of 02:58pm
>>>> When you have run that on an apache PHP installation of the same
>>>> version
>>>> PHP as I listed (5.3.6) under windows7-64 bit - get back to me.
>>>>
>>>> Otherwise I'm done repeating myself.
>>>>
>>>
>>> <?php
>>> $a = 'x11.11c';
>>> if(is_numeric($a)) { echo 'oops - a problem'; } else { echo 'okay'; }
>>> ?>
>>>
>>> Prints 'okay'
>>>
>>> Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit, PHP5.3.4, Apache2.2.17, (WAMP)
>>>
>>
>> That's backwards... you want:
>>
>> $a = 'x11.11c';
>> if(is_numeric($a)) { echo 'ok'; } else { echo 'not okay'; }
>>
>> Sorry, hit send too quick!
>>
>
> No, Richard had it correct. The if statement returns false, which is
> 'ok'. Your code would return 'not ok' - which is incorrect.
>
As per my other reply... my code returns 'not ok' because 'x11.11c'
as a string being evaluated by is_numeric() is not ok. It does not pass
as a valid number. 'not ok' -> 'not numeric'
--
Norman
Registered Linux user #461062
-Have you been to www.php.net yet?-
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.php
csiph-web