MSGID: 2:221/6.0 60def07a   
   REPLY: 1:153/716.0 0dd36754   
   PID: SmapiNNTPd/Linux/IPv6 1.3 20210401   
   CHRS: CP437 2   
   TZUTC: 0300   
   TID: hpt/lnx 1.9.0-cur 2021-05-15   
   Ardith Hinton:   
      
   AH> While  many  sources  regard  "period"  & "full stop" as   
   AH> synonymous, BTW, my inclination is to think of a  period   
   AH> as  a punctuation mark (.) which is used in various ways   
   AH> but may be  called  a  "full  stop"  at  the  end  of  a   
   AH> sentence.   
      
   This distiction between the punctuation character and one of   
   its functions is very useful, do hold on fast to it.   
      
   AH> I'm very careful to make such  distinctions  in  my  own   
   AH> writing.   
      
   I  wish  I  did,  too. We must strive to use words that best   
   express the  tints,  shades,  and  nuaces  of  our  intended   
   meaning,  lest we lose those fine niceties -- first from our   
   thoughts, and then from our language.   
      
   AH> However, it seems I am often  overruled  because  double   
   AH> spacing isn't allowed in programming jargon.   
      
   Do  you mean double spacing between sentences? That's absurd   
   it should not be allowed, because  *roff -- the  oldest  and   
   nerdiest  document-formatting  system -- has natural support   
   for  it.  It  was  desinged  and  implemented  by   die-hard   
   UNIXoids. The famous Kernighan & Ritchie participated in the   
   implementation and then wrote in it their masterpiece  about   
   C.  I  still prefer *roff to LaTeX and other modern document   
   processors.   
      
   AH> While it try to make my  writing  understandable  to  my   
   AH> audience,  I  am  constantly thwarted by programmers who   
   AH> believe they can make it more efficient... (sigh).   
      
   As my boss told a colleague who asked me to  help  her  with   
   transation   into   English,   "Anton   is  much  better  at   
   translating  from  Russian  into  C#."  I  know   very   few   
   programmers who care about their (natural) language and have   
   a taste for  prose.  Their  attempts  to  refactor  (to  use   
   programming  jargon)  your  text  may  destroy it. But their   
   optionion of  what  is  said  wrong  and  unclear  is  often   
   correct,   only  the  writer  should  be  the  one  to  make   
   amendments!   
   ---    
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/123 14/0 30/0 90/1 103/705 105/81 120/340 123/131 129/305   
   SEEN-BY: 154/10 218/700 221/1 6 226/30 227/114 702 229/101 424 426   
   SEEN-BY: 229/700 1016 1017 240/1120 5832 249/206 317 261/38 282/1038   
   SEEN-BY: 301/0 1 101 113 317/3 322/757 335/364 342/200 460/58 712/848   
   SEEN-BY: 920/1 4500/1 5020/1042 5058/104   
   PATH: 221/6 301/1 229/426