Bad grammar

[Richmond]

On 09/04/2010 06:49 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
> Richmond-
>
> Saturday, September 4, 2010, 2:03:06 AM, you wrote:
>
>    
>> what I wanted to 'say' by
>>      
>    
>> if fld "fXXX" and fld "fZZZ" is empty
>>      
>    
>> was
>>      
>    
>> if fld "fXXX" is empty and fld "fZZZ" is empty
>>      
> Methinks the "bad" here is bad logic rather than bad grammar. What you
> typed was a partial logical statement (akin to using a contraction
> instead of writing out full words) and then expected the compiler to
> fill in the details and extrapolate. The compiler, being a fair-minded
> device, expanded your statement to what it knew deep in its heart you
> really meant: as Mark pointed out, that would be
>
> if fld "fXXX" is true and fld "fZZZ" is empty
>
> which is proper logic and proper grammar.
>
> Although not the logic you intended. If indeed you had typed out
> either of
>
> if fld "fXXX" is empty and fld "fZZZ" is empty
>
> or (as Thierry has cleverly pointed out)
>
> if (fld "fXXX"&  fld "fZZZ") is empty
>
> you would again have proper (and intended) logic and proper grammar.
>
> ...I'm stopping now before I start veering into the dangerous ground
> of the syntax of statements like
>
> if me is empty
>
>    

I did contextualise a bit:

"but Morpheus was hard at work wrapping me in his coils, so it came out 
the way it did;"

And having just spent 8 hours editing my way through about 50,000 lines 
of code (or, put another way,
25 times 2080 line, each version of which has subtle changes) I

th......................ink..............z..........z..................z  my 
s-y-n-t-a-x izzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

way off:

on mouseUp
   put Richmond into bed
end mouseUp


notwithstanding Morpheus, obviously the Lar of RunRev saved me . . . :)