"Martin P. Hellwig" wrote:
> Or you can argue that even when an argument is repeated indefinitely it
> doesn't make it suddenly right.
This is no good.
It's a well known fact that anything I tell you three times is true.
To demonstrate:
Tim Rowe's post earlier in this thread was the funniest
2009/1/23 Martin P. Hellwig :
> Or you can argue that even when an argument is repeated indefinitely it
> doesn't make it suddenly right.
No, but it makes for a confirmation of Schluehr's law :-)
--
Tim Rowe
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Tim Rowe wrote:
2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr :
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is that we
need to remove reference counting and the
Tim Rowe wrote:
2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr :
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is that we
need to remove reference counting and the
2009/1/23 Benjamin Kaplan :
> BTW, he said sufficiently sophisticated topic. Since there hasn't been an
> extremely long post here yet, I don't know if this counts.
Had I waited until the thread became long enough, somebody else would
have already raised the issue -- you must surely know about Sc
I dub it Schluehr's law.
On Thu, 2009-01-22 at 21:39 -0800, Kay Schluehr wrote:
> Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
> it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
> GIL.
>
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
--
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Tim Rowe wrote:
> 2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr :
> > Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
> > it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
> > GIL.
>
> Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is th
2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr :
> Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
> it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
> GIL.
Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is that we
need to remove reference counting and the GIL.
--
Tim
On 23 Jan., 08:13, Philip Semanchuk wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2009, at 12:39 AM, Kay Schluehr wrote:
>
> > Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was initially discussed
> > it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
> > GIL.
>
> Is this a variant of Godwin's Law for Python?
On Jan 23, 2009, at 12:39 AM, Kay Schluehr wrote:
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
Is this a variant of Godwin's Law for Python?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Kay Schluehr wrote:
> Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
> it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
> GIL.
+1 QOTW
- Chris
--
Follow the path of the Iguana...
http://rebertia.com
--
http://mail.pytho
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed
it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the
GIL.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
12 matches
Mail list logo
