On 2005 Jan 14, at 04:08, David Ascher wrote: > Alex Martelli wrote: > >> Yes, there is (lato sensu) "non-determinism" involved, just like in, >> say: >> for k in d: >> print k > > Wow, it took more than the average amount of googling to figure out > that lato sensu means "broadly speaking", Ooops -- sorry; I wouldn't have imagined Brazilian hits would swamp the google hits to that extent, mostly qualifying post-grad courses and the like... seems to be an idiom there for that. > and occurs as "sensu lato" with a 1:2 ratio. In Latin as she was spoken word order is very free, but the issue here is that _in taxonomy specifically_ (which was the way I intended the form!) the "sensu lato" order vastly predominates. Very exhaustive discussion of this word order choice in taxonomy at <http://www.forum-one.org/new-1967018-4338.html>, btw (mostly about "sensu scricto", the antonym). > I learned something today! ;-) Me too: about Brazilian idiom, and about preferred word-order use in Aquinas and Bonaventura. Also, a reflection: taxonomy, the classification of things (living beings, rocks, legal precedents, ...) into categories, is a discipline with many, many centuries of experience behind it. I think it is telling that taxonomists found out they require _two_ kinds of ``inheritance'' to do their job (no doubt there are all kind of _nuances_, but specialized technical wording exists for two kinds: "strict-sense" and "broad-sense")... they need to be able to assert that "A is a B _broadly speaking_" (or specifically "_strictly speaking_") so often that they evolved specific terminology. Let's hope it doesn't take OOP many centuries to accept that both "stricto sensu inheritance" (Liskovianly-correct) AND "lato sensu inheritance" are needed to do _our_ jobs!-) Alex
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4