Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

• Subject: Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s)
• From: Miles Bader <miles@...>
• Date: 2011年9月13日 13:26:26 +0900

---

Roberto Ierusalimschy <roberto@inf.puc-rio.br> writes:
> I think “condescending” is what I had in mind: "showing or
> characterized by a patronizing or superior attitude toward others"
> ('others' being the manual :)
Poor manual! TT
-miles
-- 
... reality itself is blind unintelligent force, and it is only a fluke,
it is only as a result of pure chances, that resulting from the
exuberance of this energy there are people, with values, with reason,
with languages, with cultures, ... and with love. Just a fluke.
[Alan Watts, "The Ceramic and the Fully Automatic"]

---

• References:
  • no return value vs. nil return value(s), Lorenzo Donati
  • Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s), Florian Weimer
  • Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s), Lorenzo Donati
  • Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s), Florian Weimer
  • Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s), Lorenzo Donati
  • Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s), Roberto Ierusalimschy
  • Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s), Dirk Laurie
  • Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s), Roberto Ierusalimschy

• Prev by Date: Re: Hmm. Why no binaries? - an open letter to Mike Pall
• Next by Date: Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s)
• Previous by thread: Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s)
• Next by thread: Re: no return value vs. nil return value(s)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread