From bpfk-list+bncCMHEmaCOBhDJld_lBBoET6X1BA@googlegroups.com Thu Oct 14 20:30:36 2010 Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P6b02-0003sd-Gg; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:30:36 -0700 Received: by gxk6 with SMTP id 6sf401349gxk.16 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:30:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=F0r8tMX28TwhZZvwzUwgDj423zEyxsXBTHgFH4Ir2GU=; b=P3CYpbFuVrH4sw0O0sPqraX/KaDeN5zZeZuBGmNKIbM64KbH+qzdavG7Uojt/JgeT5 o0jNCLvLdgc8BEuXRQQSzCQAn4mdNG6SMtxlmhP1BIzj1Nu1AkfKJms2KASedu2+jc0X FWL7du7a96lK9aAa3UUNdn8fHLdjoTYGzVwbA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=udER+9EzdyC/rfXqW3m6ABNeSTUmQAk3M04MRpSCdD3vMlwbnRll34kMRxIU8oGxjX IFqF3eaWija9ambDT/GCIswPq8uMMLSggjYA3jYzQOoDrOJsiZR/6T5uDNpe7giWqVxy vxugGhIXfEiMvFYRA+eaqKWJvoOuUMTwib1AU= Received: by 10.151.62.31 with SMTP id p31mr880690ybk.20.1287113417786; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:30:17 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.112.41 with SMTP id u41ls2025061ibp.1.p; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:30:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.36.73 with SMTP id s9mr93703ibd.14.1287113417537; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:30:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.36.73 with SMTP id s9mr93701ibd.14.1287113417433; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:30:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f176.google.com (mail-iw0-f176.google.com [209.85.214.176]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id b32si6989349ibq.1.2010.10.14.20.30.16; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:30:16 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.176 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.176; Received: by mail-iw0-f176.google.com with SMTP id 3so526830iwn.35 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:30:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.176.73 with SMTP id bd9mr72594ibb.134.1287113034809; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:23:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.206.68 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:23:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <9572835c-55f6-4644-be9b-dd9601570d8d@m35g2000prc.googlegroups.com> References: <70c95ba0-9cc9-4639-8e30-5e486d25cf2b@q3g2000pra.googlegroups.com> <9572835c-55f6-4644-be9b-dd9601570d8d@m35g2000prc.googlegroups.com> Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 21:23:54 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bpfk] Re: O HAI I FIXT UR LODGEBANZ From: Jonathan Jones To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.176 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f339f839c19104929f5b9c --001485f339f839c19104929f5b9c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Lindar wrote: > > (1) jei = du'u xu kau > > Makes sense. Is there any practical advantage to jei bridi vs. du'u xu > kau bridi? > > > (2) x1 jei (bridi) kei x2 = x1 se jetlai lo du'u (bridi) kei x2 > > Huh... >_> It looks to me as though the distinction between 1) and 2) is, 1) can have a value of 0 or 1, whereas 2) can have any value between 0 and 1 inclusive. Assuming I'm correct, 2) seems to be a more useful definition to me. -- mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en. --001485f339f839c19104929f5b9c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Lindar = <lindartheb= ard@yahoo.com> wrote:
> (1) jei =3D du'u xu kau

Makes sense. Is there any practical advantage to jei bridi vs. du'= ;u xu
kau bridi?

> (2) x1 jei (bridi) kei x2 =3D x1 se jetlai lo du'u (bridi) kei x2<= br>
Huh... >_>

It looks to me as though the d= istinction between 1) and 2) is, 1) can have a value of 0 or 1, whereas 2) = can have any value between 0 and 1 inclusive. Assuming I'm correct, 2) = seems to be a more useful definition to me.

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le= bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to= the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den.
--001485f339f839c19104929f5b9c--