Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Did I ever say I love cats? :-)

    Unfortunately, I'm allergic to them :-(
    • But it could be worse... they could be allergic to me... O:-)
      • "chiff", as an allergic cat would say.

        I'm a bit allergic to the cats, but I take lots of antihistimines for it. Mostly all these new kitties make me itch and itch, not so much a runny nose or anything. I think I should get better once I give them a good bath tomorrow, to get all the dust and whatnot off them.

        • I have no problems with itching, but I do get the runny nose and really wet eyes :-) I inhale some strange thing every Sunday to take care of that, which make my nose bleed from time to time... it's quite a good story, the one of how it works :-)

          New kitties usually do me no harm (apart from when they scratch, of course)... it's the older ones that get to me, as they are always loosing fur... (was that the right word?)

          • always loosing fur... (was that the right word?)

            The right word, I believe, was "hair" :-)

            • The usual word would be "shedding", which implies the "hair"/"fur" part.

              (Also, look up "loose" versus "lose" -- not that there's any way to know without memorization. Actually "loose" almost makes sense in this context, but no English speaker would say it -- in fact, few English speakers use "loose" as a verb in any context.)
              • Thanks :-)

                look up "loose" versus "lose"

                I have a similar problem with "chose" and "choose"... as with many other words :-)

                I wonder how many errors I make a day... :-|

                • Lots of native English speakers have the same problems. A lot of English spelling results from arbitrary choices that happened to get fossilized. For example, there's no real reason why the past tense of "read" is spelled "read" but the past tense of "lead" is spelled "led" even though the two past tenses rhyme -- they could just as well be "red" and "lead", but they aren't.
              • Actually this came up just recently on a mailing list I'm on. Someone had the following quote from John Adams as their sig:

                This is the established Order of Things, when a Nation has grown to such an height of Power as to become dangerous to Mankind, she never fails to loose her Wisdom, her Justice and her Moderation, and with these she never fails to loose her Power.

                Someone thought that "loose" must have been a typo, but both "lose" and "loose" work there and mean subtly different things.

                And it t

                • I don't think that "loose" really works very well in that sentence, though. According to the OED, "loose" was used as a spelling for what we now spell "lose" in the 15th through 18th centuries, so I'd imagine that's what Adams meant. Similarly, "choose" is spelled "chuse" in the Constitution.
                  • Loose versus lose used to drive me insane.

                    But, on balance, loose has some historical heft behind it and the spelling is easier. Maybe in 100 years loose will be correct.

                    Its seems to be going the way of the dodo. And why not? It's unlike every other possessive in the english language. The inaudible distinction from it is -> it's seems unnecessary -- this problem doesn't occur in speech.

                    I still can't stand horde/hoard, though.