On Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 10:37:18 PM UTC-5, Steve D'Aprano wrote: > On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:34 am, Mikhail V wrote: > > > Ok, in this narrow context I can also agree. > > But in slightly wider context that phrase may sound almost like: > > "neither geometrical shape is better than the other as a basis > > for a wheel. If you have polygonal wheels, they are still called wheels." > > I'm not talking about wheels, I'm talking about writing systems which are > fundamentally collections of arbitrary shapes. There's nothing about the sound > of "f" that looks like the letter "f".
He was not talking about wheels either. He was making a rhetorical point as to the relationship between wheels (aka: perfect circles) and "approximations of wheels" (aka: equilateral and equiangular N-sided polygons). Here's a free tip: next time you're feeling confused by metaphors, but _before_ you reply, first do a "toupee check". If it's missing, then consider that the atmospheric disturbance created from a fast moving concept that buzzed your noggin may have flung it off. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
