What is Invariant Good For?

[Bruce Adams]

On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 02:52:10 +0100, Sean Kelly <sean at invisibleduck.org>  
wrote:

> == Quote from Walter Bright (newshound1 at digitalmars.com)'s article
>> Bruce Adams wrote:
>> > It strikes me that 'dibblego' is some kind of troll or an extreme  
>> pedant
>> > from a parallel experience.
>> > I'm not sure how much communicating with it is educational. I  
>> understand
>> > all the terms he's using but none of the meanings he
>> > is ascribing to them. And calling you a pseudo intellectual for no
>> > obvious reason strikes me as very troll-like not to mention
>> > rude.
>> His post missed the point of the article by focusing on the definition
>> of a word. At some point, who cares what the word is, it's the concept
>> that matters.
>
> But words represent concepts... generally very specific ones.  It's why
> writing poetry is so darn hard.

Actually its quite the reverse. In normal usage (insert your definition
of normal here) words have several grey, slightly overlapping and fuzzy  
meanings.
And that's ignoring the synonyms and sounds-a-likes. Its only when you try  
to
write in a so called technical English that meanings get narrowed down and  
eve
then it doesn't take much to find a confusing alternate meaning for them.  
As
programmers we are uniquely blessed/cursed with 'words' that mean  
precisely one
thing when passed to a specific compiler in a certain context. :-)

Regards,

Bruce.