|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Is your ISP Influenza-ready?
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 07:34:19AM -0400, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 10:53:33AM -0700, David W. Hankins wrote: > ... > > It's like someone intentionally optimized this function specifically to > > be the most pessimal. > ... > > If you know the word "pessimal" [malus, pejor, pessimus = bad, worse, > worst], you should know that "most pessimal" is redundant - perhaps > allowable for emphasis - and that "optimized to be pessimal" is so much > an oxymoron it must be deliberate. But why not just say "pessimized"? Actually, I had no idea I'd used the words. When I was in my youth, I read the story of "Mel, a Real Programmer". In it, the author actually used two words that have stuck with me ever since (more included here for context): Mel never wrote time-delay loops, either, even when the balky Flexowriter required a delay between output characters to work right. He just located instructions on the drum so each successive one was just *past* the read head when it was needed; the drum had to execute another complete revolution to find the next instruction. He coined an unforgettable term for this procedure. Although "optimum" is an absolute term, like "unique", it became common verbal practice to make it relative: "not quite optimum" or "less optimum" or "not very optimum". Mel called the maximum time-delay locations the "most pessimum". I admit to forgeting it was -mum, not -mal. Thank you for reminding me. -- David W. Hankins "If you don't do it right the first time, Software Engineer you'll just have to do it again." Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. -- Jack T. Hankins Attachment:
pgp00022.pgp
|