From: already5chosen@yahoo.com

On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 18:33:28 GMT
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:

> Michael S  writes:
> >On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 03:53:09 +0000
> >Tristan Wibberley
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 28/01/2026 17:54, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> >> > Keith Thompson  writes:
> >> >
> >> >> Tim Rentsch  writes:
> >>
> >> >> In my opinion, keeping a function's definition and declarations
> >> >> consistent is absolutely worth it, even if the language might
> >> >> not require it.
> >> >
> >> > Without some sort of accompanying rationale, this unadorned
> >> > statement of opinion conveys no useful information.
> >>
> >> That's an ironically appropriate use of "this". If you'd said
> >> "that" it wouldn't have been true.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Care to elaborate for the benifit of non-native English readers?
> >Personally, in this particular context, I don't see how 'this'
> >carries different meaning from 'that'.
> >
>
> English is often ambiguous.   'This' in the context of Tim's
> response is ambiguous and could be interpreted to refer to
> Tim's response itself, rather than to Keith's statement.
>

Thank you

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)