David Schultz wrote: > > So the worst possible outcome in the failure case is that it > > fails -- which it already does, without the assumption -- and > > the best possible outcome is that it succeeds when it wouldn't > > have. > > > > "Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't" > > Sometimes. But see http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/DWIM.html
I understand, but having a different failure is no worse than having a failure, I think. In either case, it doesn't work, even if it doesn't work in an entirely different way. | Everyone knows that dragons don't exist. But while this simplistic | formulation may satisfy the layman, it does not suffice for the | scientific mind. The School of Higher Neantical Nillity is in fact | wholly unconcerned with what does exist. Indeed, the banality of | existence has been so amply demonstrated, there is no need for us to | discuss it any further here. The brilliant Cerebron, attacking the | problem analytically, discovered three distinct kinds of dragon: the | mythical, the chimerical, and the purely hypothetical. They were all, | one might say, nonexistent, but each nonexisted in an entirely | different way ... | -- Stanislaw Lem, "Cyberiad" 8-). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
