On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 12:33:03PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote: > On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 02:20:46AM -0400, David H. Adler wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:57:11PM -0400, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > > > This is really a language feature; you should add it to the hq9+ > > > implementation. > > > > Sadly, this was not considered when hq9+ was developed, so it's not > > actually part of the language. Maybe someone should develop and > > extended version - hq9+42 > > No, hq9*6, surely?
Well, that loses the all-important increment op. How about hq9+(6*9) ? > (if everyone is still in the dark about six by nine see > http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci211501,00.html > ) Frankly, I always thought that Arthur's explanation was more convincing than the base 13 argument... dha -- David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/ "We are the Borg. You will be assimilated! Nah, only kidding. We're just the Sontarans. Care to take part in some 'medical research'?"
