From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marcin Borkowski Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: A guide on setting up C/C++ development environment for Emacs Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:43:27 +0200 Organization: WMI UAM Message-ID: <20140828214327.48d41c9c@aga-netbook> References: <513ad0e2-f7f4-484c-b17b-7c94a8c2fc7a@googlegroups.com> <8738chaieo.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87tx4x9353.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87ppfl91ft.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87lhq98zoy.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87ha0x8xbh.fsf@wanadoo.es> <0dd00724-ae02-4a11-9c9b-aa94a601c363@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1409255045 5036 80.91.229.3 (28 Aug 2014 19:44:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 19:44:05 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 28 21:43:56 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XN5bw-0002cR-8e for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:43:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38721 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XN5bv-0000NM-SS for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 15:43:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41042) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XN5be-0000M3-Nf for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 15:43:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XN5bY-0004MK-Bd for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 15:43:38 -0400 Original-Received: from msg.wmi.amu.edu.pl ([2001:808:114:2::50]:38539) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XN5bY-0004LP-5R for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 15:43:32 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by msg.wmi.amu.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 396A746C87 for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:43:29 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from msg.wmi.amu.edu.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (msg.wmi.amu.edu.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Km4xDdAB5lHQ for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:43:29 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from aga-netbook (unknown [185.13.171.31]) by msg.wmi.amu.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09CA546C7A for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:43:28 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.20; i686-pc-linux-gnu) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:808:114:2::50 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:99482 Archived-At: Dnia 2014-08-28, o godz. 13:13:53 Jai Dayal napisa=C5=82(a): > So, let me ask again: how many people have been killed in the name of > science vs. killed in the name of religion? It's pretty clear: very > few people have murdered someone else because "the science dictates > this should happen", when many people have killed other people simply > because of religious dogma. This is becoming totally off-topic, but to keep things precise: 1. I have yet to hear about a murder because "the science dictates this should happen". Unless we count in pseudo-science, that is, like the "science" of racial purity of the German authorities during WW2 and similar things. Nobody's going to treat this seriously as "science", though. 2. I have also yet to hear about a murder "because of religious dogma". I've heard about murders because of false interpretations and/or false religions, but not about a single one because of a *dogma*. So for me, it's rather a 0:0 draw. Of course, we *might* count in pseudo-religious causes, but then why don't we count in pseudo-science? Both ways of counting are similarly dishonest. Best, --=20 Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University