On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, Maurice Kinal wrote to mark lewis:

 ml> they do not match... the second line has one more space at the 
 ml> beginning that has pushed the additional glyphs over...

 MK> But they would match exactly given that the first character is 
 MK> counted as 0 (UNIX-think) instead of 1 (DOS-think).

bullshit... that's "programmer think" and "non-programmer think"... no matter
whether you start from 0 or 1, the additional offset in the second line is
still there after the conversion... that's the problem with using tabs for
alignment... i've always viewed their use as laziness by those who can't hit
the space bar a few more times...

 MK> If you count from 0 with tab stop(s) set to 4 then they match 
 MK> perfectly once you adjust the first line to account for the 
 MK> DOS-think 'bug'.

no such thing... the data you sent is what was used... no massaging of the data
is needed or should ever be used... straight conversion... one tab, X spaces...
the offset would be larger with larger values of X...

 MK> It is your DOS-think editor that is getting it 'wrong' but only 
 MK> because of the indexing or offset from the start of the line.  
 MK> Superior methodologies index starting at 0 not 1.  :::tsk, tsk:::

no way... the editor counts the same way on every line... it has no concept of
one style or another and cannot adjust itself individually on each line...
whether the programmer started each line counting with 0 or 1 has nothing to do
with the discussion... this is not a "one off" error...

 MK> As of this post I am claiming bragging rights.  However I am 
 MK> leaving the tab stops to the default 8 which every app I checked 
 MK> on my linux boxes seems to agree with as being the correct and 
 MK> superior behavior.  :::evil grin::: 

why do you always ruin what was a decent conversation with crap like this?

)\/(ark