 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / May 2009l33t and the love of god stop.
Hi all, On this webpage: http://www.donationcoder.com/Reviews/Archive/TextEditor/index.html, I've seen the following sentence : For all of our friends who insist that notepad is l33t and who refuse to write html in anything but notepad. For the love of god stop. I cann't understand the following words (phrases) in the above sentence: 1- What's the meaning of _l33t_? 2- What's the meaning of _the love of god stop_? Thanks in advance.  Signature.: Hongyi Zhao [ hongyi.zhao AT gmail.com ] Free as in Freedom :. > On this webpage: > http://www.donationcoder.com/Reviews/Archive/TextEditor/index.html, > I've seen the following sentence : > For all of our friends who insist that notepad is l33t and who > refuse to write html in anything but notepad. For the love of god > stop. > I cann't understand the following words (phrases) in the above > sentence: > 1- What's the meaning of _l33t_? That's a leet spelling of "leet", a way of writing English used on the internet by some people. It is being used here to mean "cool" or "admirable". There is more than you want to know about l33t in this Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet . > 2- What's the meaning of _the love of god stop_? It should be "For the love of God, stop." "For the love of God" is an expression used to indicate that you are making a serious request, an earnest plea that someone should do something that is clearly morally desirable, usually involving the showing of mercy. It is often used ironically, as it is here. One famous example of a sincere use is in Edgar Allen Poe's story "The Cask of Amontillado", where a man who is being buried alive pleads for mercy from his captor, "For the love of God, Montresor". CDB filted: >> On this webpage: >> http://www.donationcoder.com/Reviews/Archive/TextEditor/index.html, [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet . What's so l33t about writing HTML in Notepad, anyway?...is there any other way to write HTML (as opposed to letting FrontPage or some other handholder application write it for you and in the process incorporate a lot of khazerai you don't need)?...r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >What's so l33t about writing HTML in Notepad, anyway?...is there any other way >to write HTML (as opposed to letting FrontPage or some other handholder >application write it for you and in the process incorporate a lot of khazerai >you don't need)?...r I have seen people write HTML in Word. Of course, the proper tool is Emacs[0] with psgml-mode.[1] (Or some other text editor that understands SGML... IIRC, Mark Brader has worked for a company that made such a thing, although not necessarily contemporaneously.) Many people would say that nobody should ever write HTML, but rather, it should be generated from some other (supposedly more human-readable) format. I've found the quality of machine-generated HTML to be atrocious, and what you lose in expressiveness you don't gain back in ease of use. -GAWollman [0] Referring in this case to the general class of Emacs editors and not to a specific implementation. I personally use XEmacs, but I don't consider users of other Emacs implementations to be heretical. [1] Avoid the various things calling themselves "html-mode". SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are wollman@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness >I have seen people write HTML in Word. Those are girly men. Real men write HTML with COPY CON SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk >>I have seen people write HTML in Word. > > Those are girly men. > > Real men write HTML with COPY CON Not cat? SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The plural of "anecdote" 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |is not "data" Palo Alto, CA 94304 kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>I have seen people write HTML in Word. > >Those are girly men. > >Real men write HTML with COPY CON BTDT. (Well, 'cat > foo' or -- more often -- 'echo ... | bar' -- but effectively the same thing.) Uh, kinda often, now that I think about it. I've also picked up the bad habit of throwing in HTML markup for everything I used to use 'nroff' for back in the day. But your assignment of 'real men' and 'girly men' labels entertainingly ironic, considering. ;-) (And yes, I've also catted keyboard input straight into the C compiler on occasion, for reasons other than bragging rights.) SignatureD. Glenn Arthur Jr./The Human Vibrator, dglenn@panix.com Due to hand/wrist problems my newsreading time varies so I may miss followups. "Being a _man_ means knowing that one has a choice not to act like a 'man'." http://www.panix.com/~dglenn/ http://dglenn.livejournal.com > In article <gudj6101...@drn.newsguy.com>, > > >What's so l33t about writing HTML in Notepad, anyway?...is there any other way > >to write HTML (as opposed to letting FrontPage or some other handholder > >application write it for you and in the process incorporate a lot of khazerai > >you don't need)?...r And cause a document that worked to stop working. Took me a while to figure out what the problem was. > I have seen people write HTML in Word. > > Of course, the proper tool is Emacs[0] with psgml-mode.[1] (Or some > other text editor that understands SGML... Last HTML I wrote (a few months ago), I used vi. I'm not going to defend this. > IIRC, Mark Brader has > worked for a company that made such a thing, although not necessarily > contemporaneously.) I wanted that to be, "Mark Brader has worked for a company that *has made* such a thing, although not necessarily contemporaneously." I can't tell you why. > Many people would say that nobody should ever write HTML, but rather, > it should be generated from some other (supposedly more > human-readable) format. I've found the quality of machine-generated > HTML to be atrocious, and what you lose in expressiveness you don't > gain back in ease of use. Oh, man, where were you when I needed you? > [0] Referring in this case to the general class of Emacs editors and > not to a specific implementation. I personally use XEmacs, but I > don't consider users of other Emacs implementations to be heretical. It's a sad commentary on something that you felt it advisable to make that last disclaimer. > [1] Avoid the various things calling themselves "html-mode". Oh, man... -- Jerry Friedman In our last episode, <af6f6b2b-88da-4eda-8a4e-fe4f756ba74a@d38g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, the lovely and talented Jerry Friedman broadcast on alt.usage.english: >> [0] Referring in this case to the general class of Emacs editors and >> not to a specific implementation. I personally use XEmacs, but I >> don't consider users of other Emacs implementations to be heretical. > It's a sad commentary on something that you felt it advisable to make > that last disclaimer. Editor wars are beneath my dignity. joe SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> usenet@larseighner.com 113 days since Rick Warren prayed over Bush's third term. Obama: No hope, no change, more of the same. Yes, he can, but no, he won't. Lars Eighner filted: >In our last episode, ><af6f6b2b-88da-4eda-8a4e-fe4f756ba74a@d38g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Editor wars are beneath my dignity. It wasn't a war, it was a declaration of ecumenism....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >CDB filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >What's so l33t about writing HTML in Notepad, anyway?...is there any other way >to write HTML Of course there is. Use TextPad. http://www.textpad.com/ Or if you want a code editor that understands (X)HTML and inserts only what you tell it to, use Homesite or Topstyle. >(as opposed to letting FrontPage or some other handholder >application write it for you and in the process incorporate a lot of khazerai >you don't need)?...r SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >> What's so l33t about writing HTML in Notepad, anyway?...is there any other >> way to write HTML > Of course there is. Use TextPad. > http://www.textpad.com/ > Or if you want a code editor that understands (X)HTML and inserts only > what you tell it to, use Homesite or Topstyle. Whoa! I'm still trying to get my head around the thought that anything which runs on Windows could be considered l33t. SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> usenet@larseighner.com 112 days since Rick Warren prayed over Bush's third term. Obama: No hope, no change, more of the same. Yes, he can, but no, he won't. > CDB filted: > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > application write it for you and in the process incorporate a lot of khazerai > you don't need)?...r I rather like Textpad, or Notepad++. I was very sad to hear that someone's still using vi. On May 15, 12:45 pm, teddysn...@hotmail.com wrote: > > CDB filted: > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > I rather like Textpad, or Notepad++. I was very sad to hear that > someone's still using vi. I guess there's a fairly large amount of retraining necessary to go from "<esc>:wq" to "C-x C-f", or example. In fact, when I'm forced to use MS Word, I tend to litter the text with :w all over the place. Fact of the matter is that the more modern flavours of vi (like Vim) are pretty damn powerful, and, once you learn any one editor well enough (whichever one it may be), there's not much of a motivation to drop it for another. >On May 15, 12:45 pm, teddysn...@hotmail.com wrote: >> I rather like Textpad, or Notepad++. I was very sad to hear that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >from "<esc>:wq" to "C-x C-f", or example. In fact, when I'm forced to >use MS Word, I tend to litter the text with :w all over the place. Me too. Well, its more often a text-entry field on a web page than MS Word, but the same problem. >Fact of the matter is that the more modern flavours of vi (like Vim) >are pretty damn powerful, and, once you learn any one editor well >enough (whichever one it may be), there's not much of a motivation to >drop it for another. This! Vim/vi is _powerful_ (as is Emacs, but Emacs hates me). Sure, it's less novice-friendly than Notepad, but my novice days are long past and there's no point to my giving up the kind of power vi puts at my fingertips now that I've done the work to gain access to that power. Another advantage of vi is that when I want to do serious text-munging in a pipeline, I can use the same familiar syntax with 'sed'. SignatureD. Glenn Arthur Jr./The Human Vibrator, dglenn@panix.com Due to hand/wrist problems my newsreading time varies so I may miss followups. "Being a _man_ means knowing that one has a choice not to act like a 'man'." http://www.panix.com/~dglenn/ http://dglenn.livejournal.com >>I guess there's a fairly large amount of retraining necessary to go >>from "<esc>:wq" to "C-x C-f", or example. In fact, when I'm forced to >>use MS Word, I tend to litter the text with :w all over the place. > >Me too. Well, its more often a text-entry field on a web page >than MS Word, but the same problem. See, here's another religious issue: do you use ":wq" or do you use "ZZ" (a synonym for ":xit")? vi users I know generally use one or the other, never both, although the semantics are slightly different. And then we can get into the differences between Real vi(1) and vim. To some people, vim is an Abomniation before the Lord. I prefer traditional vi when I'm forced to use vi for some reason, but I don't think the vim users are heretics. I do have to be faily adept at code-switching, since most of my writing environment is in XEmacs, but I spend a lot of the time editing configuration files on remote servers where the presence of XEmacs is unlikely. (Sometimes there's a late-model FSFmacs installed, which isn't terribly helpful since it won't read my dotfiles even if I bothered to install them on each and every server I help administer.) -GAWollman SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are wollman@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness >See, here's another religious issue: do you use ":wq" or do you use >"ZZ" (a synonym for ":xit")? vi users I know generally use one or the >other, never both, although the semantics are slightly different. Oddly enough, I use both ("ZZ" much more often, but ":wq" and ":w^M:n" often enough that they come quite naturally to my fingers), and hadn't twigged to its being a religious issue aming vi users. (I also switch back and forth between 6-string and 12-string guitars, while most of the other guitarists I know either fall in love with 12-strings so deeply that they pretty much stop playing sixes, or find twelves more trouble than they're worth and stick to 6-string. Most gigs where I'm on guitar, I bring one of each and play half the tunes on one and half on t'other. So maybe I just like having options.) I learned ":wq" long before someone showed me "ZZ". >And then we can get into the differences between Real vi(1) and vim. >To some people, vim is an Abomniation before the Lord. I prefer >traditional vi when I'm forced to use vi for some reason, but I don't >think the vim users are heretics. I looked askance at vim at first, and considered the existence of a "be [almost] vi-compatible" option reassuring in case its un-vi-ness started to upset me, but I left it in its default configuration to give it a fair shake, and soon discovered that in many (not all) of the ways it differs from vi, I either preferred the vim way or found switching back and forth painless. I've come to take multiple-level undo for granted and notice when I'm using bona-fide vi mostly by having the second undo undo the undo instead of undoing the penultimate pre-undo action. (Admittedly, sometimes being able to just ht 'u' again instead of ":redo" is a big win. It took me a while to decide I liked vim's behaviour there. But now I prefer it.) So presently I'm ever so slightly more a vim user than a vi user, but the vast majority of what I routinely use is common to both and I (mostly) don't mind switching back and forth. (Switching between the Linux, BSD, and SunOS versions of /usr/bin/mail gives me more trouble that switching between vi and vim. And that's still not as bad as slowly realizing I'm at an sh/ksh/bash prompt instead of the expected csh/tcsh.) This is, of course, subject to change ifwhen I start using the syntax-aware features of vim more than I have been. >I do have to be faily adept at code-switching, since most of my >writing environment is in XEmacs, but I spend a lot of the time [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >dotfiles even if I bothered to install them on each and every server I >help administer.) Once upon a time I had to worry about whether the each next random Unix system I had to work on would have vi or force me to try to remember how to use ed -- I did bump into a few that old. Fortunately those days seem to be gone, and the closest I come to that situation is when I get to Windows machines that I haven't had a chance to install Cygwin on yet. SignatureD. Glenn Arthur Jr./The Human Vibrator, dglenn@panix.com Due to hand/wrist problems my newsreading time varies so I may miss followups. "Being a _man_ means knowing that one has a choice not to act like a 'man'." http://www.panix.com/~dglenn/ http://dglenn.livejournal.com Garrett Wollman: >> See, here's another religious issue: do you use ":wq" or do you use >> "ZZ" (a synonym for ":xit")? vi users I know generally use one or the >> other, never both, although the semantics are slightly different. Glenn Arthur: > Oddly enough, I use both ... I also use both. >> And then we can get into the differences between Real vi(1) and vim. >> To some people, vim is an Abomniation before the Lord. I prefer >> traditional vi when I'm forced to use vi for some reason, but I don't >> think the vim users are heretics. > I looked askance at vim at first... [but] soon discovered that > in many (not all) of the ways it differs from vi, I either > preferred the vim way or found switching back and forth painless. > I've come to take multiple-level undo for granted ... Yes, and that's a big deal. Particularly when you can use it with a repeat count to undo many operations. > (Admittedly, sometimes being able to just ht 'u' > again instead of ":redo" is a big win...) ":redo"? Doesn't your version have control-R? The other thing I like in vim and use a lot is the way that backspacing in insert mode can extend to delete before the text you were inserting, and also before the current line. > So presently I'm ever so slightly more a vim user than a > vi user, but the vast majority of what I routinely use is > common to both and I (mostly) don't mind switching back and > forth. ... Yep, same here. The syntax-awareness and search-result highlighting and all that garbage is stuff I make a point of turning off. SignatureMark Brader "...but the past thousand years Toronto, msb@vex.net have been atypical." My text in this article is in the public domain. > One famous example of a sincere use is in Edgar Allen Poe's story "The > Cask of Amontillado", where a man who is being buried alive Immured SignatureJohn Dean Oxford >> One famous example of a sincere use is in Edgar Allen Poe's story >> "The Cask of Amontillado", where a man who is being buried alive > Immured Yes, or "walled in", as I originally wrote. I changed it to "buried" because I'm not sure how large an English vocabulary the OP works with. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.