From: already5chosen@yahoo.com   
      
   On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 18:33:28 GMT   
   scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:   
      
   > Michael S  writes:   
   > >On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 03:53:09 +0000   
   > >Tristan Wibberley   
   > > wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> On 28/01/2026 17:54, Tim Rentsch wrote:   
   > >> > Keith Thompson  writes:   
   > >> >   
   > >> >> Tim Rentsch  writes:   
   > >>   
   > >> >> In my opinion, keeping a function's definition and declarations   
   > >> >> consistent is absolutely worth it, even if the language might   
   > >> >> not require it.   
   > >> >   
   > >> > Without some sort of accompanying rationale, this unadorned   
   > >> > statement of opinion conveys no useful information.   
   > >>   
   > >> That's an ironically appropriate use of "this". If you'd said   
   > >> "that" it wouldn't have been true.   
   > >>   
   > >>   
   > >   
   > >Care to elaborate for the benifit of non-native English readers?   
   > >Personally, in this particular context, I don't see how 'this'   
   > >carries different meaning from 'that'.   
   > >   
   >   
   > English is often ambiguous.   'This' in the context of Tim's   
   > response is ambiguous and could be interpreted to refer to   
   > Tim's response itself, rather than to Keith's statement.   
   >   
      
   Thank you   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)