dn>> For some reason Paul associates misinformation with Borland
 dn>> users. I differ with him on this point - the fact that
 dn>> Borland users are the most numerous in terms of being
 dn>> providers of misinformation in programming conferences is
 dn>> only a statement of the compiler's relative popularity.

 PE>> Closer to the mark is that they are more affordable, so the
 PE>> imbeciles can afford them, so the average IQ of a Borland
 PE>> user is considerably less.

 dn> That's an interesting brand of 'intellectual elitism' there. Ever thought
 dn> of joining Mensa?

No, you weren't meant to take that quite literally.

 PE>> You go from being a Borland User to a Borland Fan when you
 PE>> have less than a certain IQ.

 dn> My original point is that users of all compilers have the same number of
 dn> 'morons' as users. There may well be some truth to the demography though,
 dn> but I can't stretch my imagination far enough to see any direct connection
 dn> between intelligence and income.

Not so much IQ, as "professional".  If you use the compiler for a
living, you are more likely to spring for the more expensive compiler,
especially if that is what you are being paid to write in.

 dn> Of course, if I were to be prejudiced and show unreasoned bias, then that
 dn> would be clear indication of hypocracy.  An "anti-Borland
Fan" is really
 dn> no better than a "Borland Fan" - in both cases it's
pretty much a question
 dn> of religious conviction rather than an application of reason.

Obviously I don't think that using a Borland compiler makes you a complete
moron, otherwise I'd have to admit that I'm a moron, as I have stuck
exclusively with their compilers.

BTW, you should be wary of getting into serious and protracted debates with
someone who microwaves ants in the hope that the message gets back to the
management (quote, Bill Hely).  :-)  BFN.

Paul

--- GoldED/2 2.42.G1114