Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 00:56:42 UTC+3, uakci escreveu:
Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 00:24:22 UTC+3, uakci escreveu:
I wouldn't say it's incomplete. I would just say it failed to meet its goals.
Well, then that makes it a complete failure. :P
And nevertheless the project lives on and the interest in it is non zero despite all its failures which don't seem to bother fluent speakers a lot.
I’m a fluent speaker and I’m bothered.
I mean if you are fluent you can't be bothered or else you are not fluent.
Perhaps we're talking about different senses of the word 'bothered'. I'm not bothered because I speak a dialect which works around these issues. I could use the fossilized official dialect, but I'd risk many, many moments of frustration and encumberment.
If the language works there is no problem.
It doesn't really work that well, so there is a problem.
If the thing is speakable then it works.
Unless this is not what one was intending it to work.
I'm not sure I grok this sentence. As I've said before, there's the issue of overengineering. Sure, I can speak the bloated variants of Lojban, but why should I if there are better solutions at reach? (Zantufa, Toaq, Xorban are all examples of great non-overengineered work.)
Some person may say: the first Hilbert operator is bi'u, the second one is lo'o'o'o'o'u and then another person would come and say: no, you misread Hilbert so that's how I think it should work and hereby I propose lo'o'o'o'ou
I don't know what is better here and who are the judges.
Lojban even if failed elsewhere shines here in it's stability.
And since Lojban is 35 years old and itself heavily borrowing from a 65-year-old language, it might be time to *remove* rather than *amend*. One example: solpahi's connective system works just as well as the current one — which may have had to be this way due to YACC's limitations — but offers less bloat.
I feel no bloat in it at all but backward incompatibility as a drawback.
Then we should speak English. Or toki pona (depending on the meaning of the word "simple")
and straightforwardness, why don't we choose simplicity and straightforwardness if, again, it's within arm's reach?
Because there are also aspiring students within arm's reach.
You learned something, good to you.
Now create a copy of the database and test your crud operations on it so that new learners can have python2 final version now and forever.