X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["800" "Fri" "13" "June" "1997" "15:52:15" "+0100" "Sebastian Rahtz" "s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.UK" nil "15" "Re: automatic numbering" "^Date:" nil nil "6" nil nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.5/8.8.4) with ESMTP id SAA28062; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 18:15:04 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <12.AE04D51D@listserv.gmd.de>; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 17:21:23 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 152623 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 16:52:14 +0200 Received: from pillar.elsevier.co.uk (root@pillar.elsevier.co.uk [193.131.222.35]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.7.6/8.7.4) with ESMTP id QAA09692 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 16:52:12 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from snowdon.elsevier.co.uk (snowdon.elsevier.co.uk [193.131.197.164]) by pillar.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA02546 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 15:48:40 +0100 (BST) Received: from cadair.elsevier.co.uk by snowdon.elsevier.co.uk with SMTP (PP); Fri, 13 Jun 1997 15:52:07 +0100 Received: from knott.elsevier.co.uk (knott.elsevier.co.uk [193.131.197.165]) by cadair.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA25554 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 15:51:58 +0100 (BST) Received: (from srahtz@localhost) by knott.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.3/8.8.5) id PAA02550; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 15:52:15 +0100 (BST) References: <970613153230.c3c@vms.rhbnc.ac.uk> Message-ID: <199706131452.PAA02550@knott.elsevier.co.uk> Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: <970613153230.c3c@vms.rhbnc.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 15:52:15 +0100 From: Sebastian Rahtz Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: automatic numbering Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2032 > portability. It is only when one discovers that each "reliable compiler" > implements its own dialect, that each operating system intersperses its > own nuances, that each architecture contributes its own artifacts, that > one discovers that such "portability" is a complete and utter myth... but it isnt a myth. the whole world (except you) revolves around this concept of loose portability, ie we swop C programs and they work. 99.99% of the time. you dont use it, because you care about that .001% of cases. but i'll be dead and gone before the statistics catch up with, and hey if a program misbehaves tomorrow and I get unlucky, tant pis. Year-2000ism, or a runaway bus, or AIDS, or global warming, or CJD could catch up with me as well. i take the risk, and get on with life sebastian