Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?
From: Robert Low (mtx014_at_linux.services.coventry.ac.uk)
Date: 08/28/04
- Next message: Chris Menzel: "Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?"
- Previous message: Christopher A. Lee: "Re: Atheists dying"
- In reply to: David C. Ullrich: "Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?"
- Next in thread: David C. Ullrich: "Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?"
- Reply: David C. Ullrich: "Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?"
- Reply: Chris Menzel: "Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 28 Aug 2004 10:47:48 GMT
David C. Ullrich <ullrich@math.okstate.edu> wrote:
>(Robert Low) wrote:
>>You have no idea what 'a forteriori' means, do you?
>
>uh, to be fair i don't either. if you'd said 'a fortiori'
>i'd understand what -that-0 meant...
Oh, bugger. My mistake. I'm sure I've been saying
and writing 'a forteriori' for a long time, too.
Must have somehow polluted it with 'a posteriori'.
-- Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
- Next message: Chris Menzel: "Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?"
- Previous message: Christopher A. Lee: "Re: Atheists dying"
- In reply to: David C. Ullrich: "Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?"
- Next in thread: David C. Ullrich: "Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?"
- Reply: David C. Ullrich: "Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?"
- Reply: Chris Menzel: "Re: Can a regular Turing Machine provide Protected Memory?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
