Can mystr[i]=mystr[ii] be a problem when i==ii

[Richard Bos]

Then he would do well to learn that not everybody uses a newsreader that
displays the subject line conveniently whilst the body of an article is
being displayed.

And those people would do well to complain to their newsreader
suppliers. How can they be so foolish as to not display the subject
readably above the message?[/QUOTE]

They could cleverly display only the message itself in the reader
window, and the thread tree, including the subject, in the thread
browser window.

Richard

 

[Paul S. Person]

Mine displays it in the titlebar of the window, which is not even
remotely close to the text I'm reading.

But thats hardly the point. Do you write your letter on the outside of
the envelope, and just say "see outside" on the actual paper inside?

The person I am responding to apparently believed that "above" meant
"earlier in the thread". This made his response fall in to the "not
even wrong" category. And that is the point of my post.

And I never said I thought this was a /good/ idea.

 

[Net Nanny]

You haven't gotten the point. News articles may or may not be
received anywhere. Thus each article should stand entirely by
itself. That means, among other things, proper quoting. The
following sig. may make things clearer.

--
If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, ensure
you quote enough for the article to make sense. Google is only
an interface to Usenet; it's not Usenet itself. Don't assume
your readers can, or ever will, see any previous articles.
More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>

Like your usual signature, this one breaches basic netiquette: 10 lines,
when a limit of 4 lines is conventional.

And putting part of your message in the sig is just as bad as putting it
in the subject line.

 

[Default User]

Net Nanny wrote:

Pity the person with such a device who has to fight his way through
your sig.

Ok, that's enough.

*plonk*




Brian