The_Sage said:
Bzzzt! Wrong again. Care to go for four? At the rate you are going, you might
not understand simple elementary english for another six or seven tries. But
let's try and make this so simple, even a total illiterate imbecile like you can
undestand...
The Sage drives down the court, weaving past logic, dodging past
facts, he shoots, HE SCORES! He's done it again, folks. I knew he
wouldn't let us down.
Let's watch it again in slow motion and see just how he screwed up
this time.
"It shall have a return type of type int"
That is a complete sentence in itself. The main topic/subject is: RETURN TYPE.
Any questions? Now we augment that sentence with the conjunction "but"...
You've got to hand it to The Sage, folks, he starts right off with the
boldest of blunders. The instant replay doesn't lie, so let's take a
closer look...
The main topic/subject is: RETURN TYPE.
For all those for whom English is a second language, let's be more
explict. The Sage is claiming that "return type" is the subject of the
clause "It shall have a return type of type int", yet as anyone with
an elementary education in English knows, the subject of that clause
is "It", which is a reference to the subject of the previous
sentences, and therefore means the main function.
Let's watch some more and see where he takes this...
"...but..."
If they were changing the main topic/subject, they would have started a new
paragraph/sentence. Since they didn't, the main topic/subject is still: RETURN
TYPE.
Ooo, that's got to hurt, people. The subject is still: the main
function, but that doesn't matter when you play at The Sage's level.
"But" means "on the contrary; on the other hand; with the exception". And
what exception is there to the return type?
"...otherwise in all other respects its type is implementation-defined"
"Otherwise" is an adverb. It means "In another way; differently; under other
circumstances; in other respects". So for all you illiterate idiots out there,
like Bob Bell, what does that sentence tell us about the return type? It tells
us that...
You've got to admit, folks, The Sage is slippery. Note the deft way he
avoids linking the word "its" in this clause to the subject of the
previous clause. For everyone else, it's clear that "its type" refers
to the main function's type. But by cleverly slipping in a personal
attack at just the right moment, he manages to deflect attention from
this oversight.
Let's pause for a recap. The Sage
-- failed to grasp the difference between a function's type and its
return type
-- failed to parse the sentence in question to realize the subject of
the first clause was the main function
-- failed to realize the subsequent clause was modifying the first
clause's subject, the main function
They don't call him The Sage for nothing.
"...main() shall have a return type of type int, with the exception that in
another way, in all other respects, main() can have a return type of
<implementation/defined>"
And there you have it, folks, all wrapped up in a neat little package.
I've got to hand it to The Sage, I don't see bungling of this caliber
every day.
It has been a pleasure exposing your complete ignorance in this matter for the
whole world to see.
On the contrary, the pleasure has been all mine. It's been fun, but
I've fed you long enough, I think.
Bye bye,
Bob
Yeah, The Rage *is* a ridiculous moron: