[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Re ANN: A new scripting language Tao 0.9.0 beta released!

fu.limin.tao

4/27/2005 6:05:00 PM

Christopher Browne (cbbrowne@ca.afilias.info) wrote:

> From what I can see, most of the interesting features of Icon are left
> out, such as generators, continuations, directed goal search, and
> such.

> If your language leaves out all of the sorts of features that would
> represent the reasons why one might continue to use a scripting
> language as "obscure" as Icon, why would you imagine that it would be
> of any interest to Icon users?

There is generator in Tao, but I didn't intend it to be main feature
of this language, so I didn't pay much attention in the implementation
of it and didn't mention it in the announcement.

SO FAR the main features I intended to have in Tao are about text
processing, numeric computation and extensiblity, multi-threading
will come next, then the others will come into my consideration.
So it is and will be quite different from Icon. If Icon users only like
to use Icon kind language, I admit it's a mistake to post an announcement
in Icon group.
15 Answers

Richard Steel

11/8/2011 8:42:00 PM

0


>   Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from Michigan.
> Selective memory?

What about it? The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly said
what the law was - only that it was really horrible. Not a word by
the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their side of
the story. Just hysterics.

To think that the once mighty Time Magazine has sunk to this level.
Amazing.

China Blue Veins

11/8/2011 9:05:00 PM

0

In article <d37c70b9-0239-42f1-ba49-93b7b8afe6db@i13g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
Richard Steel <rsteel2525@aol.com> wrote:

> > ? Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from Michigan.
> > Selective memory?
>
> What about it? The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly said
> what the law was - only that it was really horrible. Not a word by
> the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their side of
> the story. Just hysterics.

So.........what is the explanation?

--
White folks think they're at the top, | Faded, patched, secret so tight...
ask any proud white male. | I'm whoever you want me to be.
A million years of evolution, | Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
and we get Danny Quayle. | At least I can stay in character.

Richard Steel

11/8/2011 10:05:00 PM

0

On Nov 8, 1:05 pm, Acid Washed China Blue Jeans <chine.b...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> In article <d37c70b9-0239-42f1-ba49-93b7b8afe...@i13g2000prg.googlegroups..com>,
>  Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > >   Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from Michigan.
> > > Selective memory?
>
> > What about it?  The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly said
> > what the law was - only that it was really horrible.  Not a word by
> > the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their side of
> > the story.  Just hysterics.
>
> So.........what is the explanation?

Beats me - the press doesn't seem to much care.

MattB

11/8/2011 10:13:00 PM

0

On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 12:41:47 -0800 (PST), Richard Steel
<rsteel2525@aol.com> wrote:

>
>> ? Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from Michigan.
>> Selective memory?
>
>What about it? The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly said
>what the law was - only that it was really horrible. Not a word by
>the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their side of
>the story. Just hysterics.
>
>To think that the once mighty Time Magazine has sunk to this level.
>Amazing.


Fox news also has a story on it. To bad they have also sunk so
low.

China Blue Veins

11/8/2011 10:19:00 PM

0

In article <87839c91-a3d3-4d02-981f-68203c1f103e@p36g2000prp.googlegroups.com>,
Richard Steel <rsteel2525@aol.com> wrote:

> On Nov 8, 1:05?pm, Acid Washed China Blue Jeans <chine.b...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > In article
> > <d37c70b9-0239-42f1-ba49-93b7b8afe...@i13g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> > ?Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > ? Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from Michigan.
> > > > Selective memory?
> >
> > > What about it? ?The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly said
> > > what the law was - only that it was really horrible. ?Not a word by
> > > the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their side of
> > > the story. ?Just hysterics.
> >
> > So.........what is the explanation?
>
> Beats me - the press doesn't seem to much care.

So you have no evidence the article is biassed; you just have your assumption.

--
White folks think they're at the top, | Faded, patched, secret so tight...
ask any proud white male. | I'm whoever you want me to be.
A million years of evolution, | Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
and we get Danny Quayle. | At least I can stay in character.

Richard Steel

11/8/2011 10:29:00 PM

0

On Nov 8, 2:19 pm, Acid Washed China Blue Jeans <chine.b...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> In article <87839c91-a3d3-4d02-981f-68203c1f1...@p36g2000prp.googlegroups..com>,
>  Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 8, 1:05 pm, Acid Washed China Blue Jeans <chine.b...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <d37c70b9-0239-42f1-ba49-93b7b8afe...@i13g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> > >  Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >   Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from Michigan.
> > > > > Selective memory?
>
> > > > What about it?  The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly said
> > > > what the law was - only that it was really horrible.  Not a word by
> > > > the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their side of
> > > > the story.  Just hysterics.
>
> > > So.........what is the explanation?
>
> > Beats me - the press doesn't seem to much care.
>
> So you have no evidence the article is biassed; you just have your assumption.

I have every evidence in the world that the article is biased. Time
Magazine didn't give the GOP space to telling their side of the
story. Nothing. Not a word Time didn't even explain their side of
what the law did - only that they didn't like it.

Richard Steel

11/8/2011 10:32:00 PM

0

On Nov 8, 2:12 pm, MattB <notrdell1...@gmail.comspam.> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 12:41:47 -0800 (PST), Richard Steel
>
> <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:

> >>   Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from Michigan.
> >> Selective memory?

> >What about it?  The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly said
> >what the law was - only that it was really horrible.  Not a word by
> >the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their side of
> >the story.  Just hysterics.

> >To think that the once mighty Time Magazine has sunk to this level.
> >Amazing.

>    Fox news also has a story on it.  To bad they have also sunk so
> low.

Again, you don't give an example of how FOX New "sunk so low" - you
just accuse them, and let that stand.

I can't help but notice that you didn't care about a 78 year old woman
being shoved down a flight of cement stairs by your buddies, the
Occupy Wall Street Thugs.

Didn't you used to pretend to be a Christian? There is a price one
pays for constantly pretending to be that which they are not.

China Blue Veins

11/8/2011 10:36:00 PM

0

In article <299dfca8-4f26-4024-93f2-e614b8ec3e18@d37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
Richard Steel <rsteel2525@aol.com> wrote:

> On Nov 8, 2:19?pm, Acid Washed China Blue Jeans <chine.b...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > In article
> > <87839c91-a3d3-4d02-981f-68203c1f1...@p36g2000prp.googlegroups.com>,
> > ?Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 8, 1:05?pm, Acid Washed China Blue Jeans <chine.b...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <d37c70b9-0239-42f1-ba49-93b7b8afe...@i13g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > ?Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > ? Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from Michigan.
> > > > > > Selective memory?
> >
> > > > > What about it? ?The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly said
> > > > > what the law was - only that it was really horrible. ?Not a word by
> > > > > the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their side of
> > > > > the story. ?Just hysterics.
> >
> > > > So.........what is the explanation?
> >
> > > Beats me - the press doesn't seem to much care.
> >
> > So you have no evidence the article is biassed; you just have your
> > assumption.
>
> I have every evidence in the world that the article is biased. Time
> Magazine didn't give the GOP space to telling their side of the

Neither did you, idiot.

--
White folks think they're at the top, | Faded, patched, secret so tight...
ask any proud white male. | I'm whoever you want me to be.
A million years of evolution, | Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
and we get Danny Quayle. | At least I can stay in character.

MattB

11/8/2011 10:58:00 PM

0

On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 14:31:52 -0800 (PST), Richard Steel
<rsteel2525@aol.com> wrote:

>On Nov 8, 2:12?pm, MattB <notrdell1...@gmail.comspam.> wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 12:41:47 -0800 (PST), Richard Steel
>>
>> <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> >> ? Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from Michigan.
>> >> Selective memory?
>
>> >What about it? ?The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly said
>> >what the law was - only that it was really horrible. ?Not a word by
>> >the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their side of
>> >the story. ?Just hysterics.
>
>> >To think that the once mighty Time Magazine has sunk to this level.
>> >Amazing.
>
>> ? ?Fox news also has a story on it. ?To bad they have also sunk so
>> low.
>
>Again, you don't give an example of how FOX New "sunk so low" - you
>just accuse them, and let that stand.

You provided the standard yourself in you reply about Time
Magazine.

Here a few more


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/michigan-anti-bullying-law-protects-religious-bullies/2011/11/06/gIQAhZIdtM...

The law, Matt?s Safe School Law, named in memory of Matt Epling, who
committed suicide in the wake of relentless anti-gay bullying, offers
a loophole to those who want to bully gay students or anyone else they
don?t like. All they need to do, according to the newly passed
legislation, is claim that their bullying was based on ?a sincerely
held religious belief or moral conviction.?

****

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/280...

Why Does Michigan?s Anti-Bullying Bill Protect Religious Tormenters?

But the Michigan legislature is doing its best to make me hang my
head in shame. On Wednesday, the Republican-controlled state senate
passed an anti-bullying bill that manages to protect school bullies
instead of those they victimize. It accomplishes this impressive feat
by allowing students, teachers, and other school employees to claim
that "a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction" justifies
their harassment.

*******

Guess Muslims bombing the Towers was OK because of their "sincerely
held religious belief or moral conviction" To the Tea Party.


>
>I can't help but notice that you didn't care about a 78 year old woman
>being shoved down a flight of cement stairs by your buddies, the
>Occupy Wall Street Thugs.

A Distraction a Strawman Ok. I do hope they catch those responsible
and punish then to the MAX. There happy.
>
>Didn't you used to pretend to be a Christian? There is a price one
>pays for constantly pretending to be that which they are not.

I am a Christian and no where in the Bible does Jesus say Christians
have the right to do this. That they should bully non-Christians.
Care to show me where Jesus said it???????

Eddie Haskell

11/8/2011 11:01:00 PM

0


"Acid Washed China Blue Jeans" <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:chine.bleu-076F9C.14360608112011@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article
> <299dfca8-4f26-4024-93f2-e614b8ec3e18@d37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> Richard Steel <rsteel2525@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 8, 2:19 pm, Acid Washed China Blue Jeans <chine.b...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> > In article
>> > <87839c91-a3d3-4d02-981f-68203c1f1...@p36g2000prp.googlegroups.com>,
>> > Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > On Nov 8, 1:05 pm, Acid Washed China Blue Jeans
>> > > <chine.b...@yahoo.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > In article
>> > > > <d37c70b9-0239-42f1-ba49-93b7b8afe...@i13g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
>> > > > Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from Michigan.
>> > > > > > Selective memory?
>> >
>> > > > > What about it? The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly said
>> > > > > what the law was - only that it was really horrible. Not a word
>> > > > > by
>> > > > > the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their side
>> > > > > of
>> > > > > the story. Just hysterics.
>> >
>> > > > So.........what is the explanation?
>> >
>> > > Beats me - the press doesn't seem to much care.
>> >
>> > So you have no evidence the article is biassed; you just have your
>> > assumption.
>>
>> I have every evidence in the world that the article is biased. Time
>> Magazine didn't give the GOP space to telling their side of the
>
> Neither did you, idiot.

Where is the republican side in the article, you dumb motherfucker?

The article is biased and you fucking know it, you lying sack of shit.

It's just like with hate crimes legislation. You want crimes against your
favored groups to be worse than against straights or non-minorities instead
of equal across the board. It's divisive and downright un-American, but what
else is new with you socialist maggots?

-Eddie Haskell