From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20999 invoked by alias); 24 Sep 2002 04:44:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 20992 invoked from network); 24 Sep 2002 04:44:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.cdt.org) (206.112.85.61) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Sep 2002 04:44:48 -0000 Received: from dberlin.org (pool-138-88-48-174.res.east.verizon.net [138.88.48.174]) by mail.cdt.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041C949005C; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:21:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (HELO localhost) by dberlin.org (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b9a) with ESMTP-TLS id 250248; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:44:46 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 21:44:00 -0000 From: Daniel Berlin To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , David Carlton , Jim Blandy , Subject: Re: suggestion for dictionary representation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00363.txt.bz2 On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > > > because all string lengths are "small". > > Bullshit. > > Can you _please_ try to be polite here? TIA Um, it was clearly directed at his assertion, not him. Thus, there is nothing impolite about it (unless you are going by a rather odd definition i've only heard used once, but is still technically correct). In the future, if you are only going to scold me for using crude language, i kindly request you do it in private. Otherwise, you are just contributing noise (and when one does searches, this message will pop up when it has nothing to do with dictionarys, string lengths, etc, making it harder to find useful information). TIA, Dan