Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?
From: Paul Leyland (paul_at_leyland.vispa.com)
Date: 09/14/04
- Next message: Rob Warnock: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Previous message: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- In reply to: Rob Warnock: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Next in thread: Michael Amling: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 14 Sep 2004 11:19:19 +0100
rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) writes:
> Which is why a former co-worker of mine [occasional seen here]
> made a practice of always writing comparisons as "if (0 == a) ..."
Been doing that for many years. Glad I'm not the only one.
I alwys used to write " IMPLICIT NONE" too, despite it being
nonstandard. Likewise, I almost always compile "gcc -Wall" and often
throw in a "-pedantic" too.
Just because a language gives you enough rope to hang yourself, you
don't have to go build the scaffold too.
Paul
-- Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way. The time is gone, the song is over. Thought I'd something more to say.
- Next message: Rob Warnock: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Previous message: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- In reply to: Rob Warnock: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Next in thread: Michael Amling: "Re: "Perfect" or "Provable" security both crypto and non-crypto?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Loading