|
"To assume" is a direct-transitive verb, so I think the expression "Assume a model that can..." (the first one) is perfectly valid.
I never finish anyth
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for teaching me that!
Life is too shor
|
|
|
|
|
Let a model be describable by paths /A/B/C and /A/B/D.
I am not a native English speaker either; and have no plans of visiting Stockholm .
|
|
|
|
|
Hard to really be more helpful without understanding the context of the publication: technical computer science paper? Is "model" some kind of Graph ? The language used in the abstract of a technical paper is usually terse, with more verbose explication in the article-body.
Might try something like:
(terse) Assume a model with paths /A/B/C and /A/B/D:
(verbose) The model used here can be described with paths /A/B/C and /A/B/D.
«I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center» Kurt Vonnegut.
|
|
|
|
|
You in fact were more than helpful! I did not think that "Assume a model ..." was proper. The terse version fits like a glove. The paper is a short description of the inner workings of a software module. Thanks!
I owe you a or a Singh if I happen to wander into those environs...
Life is too shor
|
|
|
|
|
/A/B/C or /A/B/D. Pick one.
|
|
|
|
|
Personally I don't see a problem with any of the phrases. And I don't understand a need for a paper to sound a certain way, or appear clever in its writing rather than simply its subject.
However I was always poorly marked for my less verbose reports and papers at school. I could never understand how people could write a paragraph or more on something that could be clearly described in a single sentence.
|
|
|
|
|
There are several meaningful sentences that follow, so the point was to keep the first one short.
Life is too shor
|
|
|
|
|
... at the CO-OP[^].
=========================================================
I'm an optoholic - my glass is always half full of vodka.
=========================================================
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe, but I thought how could they quantify lost revenue?
They were selling at a lower profit I get that, but what about the thousands of customers that went in just to fill their trolleys full of bargains, customers that would have shopped elsewhere if there was no 20% discount.
I bet that effect, plus the free BBC advert means they are "quids-in"
|
|
|
|
|
As the discount wasn't advertised, understandably as it wasn't supposed to exist, why would there have been any more shoppers than normal? And a 20% discount is almost certainly no-profit, if not indeed minus profit, in the grocery sector where price competition is fierce. Had there been binge buying on any scale it would have been, I'd venture to suggest, a whole lot worse than it was. Heads rolling bad, in fact.
|
|
|
|
|
That's my local co-op store. According to the plaques on the wall the employee of the month is Bobby Tables.
|
|
|
|
|
Mandatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/327/[^]
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
I don't always test my code, but when I do, I do it in Production.
|
|
|
|
|
"to err is human, but to really mess things up you need a computer"
|
|
|
|
|
The article's full quote is actually:
"It's always been said that to err is human, but to really mess things up you need a computer and this is a perfect example."
...and no, this is actually a perfect example of how people mess things up. The subject line says it all - somebody forgot a WHERE clause.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't really care about specific examples, he messed up good and he needed a computer to mess up this bad
My out-of-context quote still stands strong
|
|
|
|
|
Oops!
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
Nicholas Smith, the actor who played store manager Mr Rumbold in the BBC sitcom Are You Being Served?, has died aged 81.
The last of the original cast.
veni bibi saltavi
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed, pussy was the first thought that came to my mind when I read the sad post.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
So... is no one being served?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
RIP Big Ears.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
He was also the vicar in Curse of the Were Rabbit[^]
=========================================================
I'm an optoholic - my glass is always half full of vodka.
=========================================================
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote:
The last of the original cast.
Not entirely true. I believe Stephanie Gathercole (now Reeve) who played Mr. Rumbold's secretary yet lives.
|
|
|
|