Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies

[pycyn@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/16/2002 12:59:12 PM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:

This is where things start to make no sense to me. No other
selbri restricts its places to short or complex names for
their arguments. If you want to refer to a goer in the x1 of
klama, you can use {la djan} or {le pendo be le mensi be
le patfu be le lamji xabju}, both go in x1 of klama, there is no
place for simple references and another place to refer to the
same argument but with a complex reference.

I didn't mean that fancu1 has to be filled with the short name, just that is a typical use and probably the one intended when this was set up.  Most of us use a lot of functions that we know by name but can no longer (and maybe never) know the computations for (all the trigonometrics are that for me, though I'm sure I once knew how to calculate them).  So these shorter names are more common.  There would be nothing wrong with {le du'u makau sumji ce'u li pa} in the first place, but, if you're like me, anything that I use more than a couple of times gets a name and its calculation put off somewhere (depending on what language I'm using) and from then on its all the short name (I suppose if you put the calculation in the first place, the fourth would have to be {vo'a}.)

<>I a
>really hideous case, a whole program (and so probably omitted at that point
>-- or marked with a cross reference to its layout).

No matter how hideous, it doesn't justify duplicating the x1
place. If you want it as the last argument you can always
reorder the places.>

Well, as a noted, it would rarely be a duplication and when it would be, the duplicate could be very short ({vo'a} or {vo'o} depending on where you put the original).

I don't think there is anything objectionable in the definition of {fancu}, properly understood.