Author Topic: Childhood Diseases  (Read 1888 times)

guyd

  • Logologist
  • **
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Childhood Diseases
« Reply #15 on: February 24, 2021, 11:15:27 AM »
Yay. I knew of mump as in "a great mumping villain", but like many other players was a little surprised that "mumps" was not accepted.

les303

  • Cryptoverbalist
  • *
  • Posts: 704
  • Never give up just keep on trying
    • View Profile
Re: Childhood Diseases
« Reply #16 on: February 24, 2021, 01:50:54 PM »
I agree guyd.
It was a good suggestion from the rhinophile & another swell decision from Alan.

Jacki

  • Cryptoverbalist
  • *
  • Posts: 972
    • View Profile
Re: Childhood Diseases
« Reply #17 on: February 24, 2021, 08:00:42 PM »
So is mumps still rare?
Late blooming azaleas tricked by the warmer weather into flowering

les303

  • Cryptoverbalist
  • *
  • Posts: 704
  • Never give up just keep on trying
    • View Profile
Re: Childhood Diseases
« Reply #18 on: February 24, 2021, 08:51:04 PM »
" Mumps will be accepted from now on as a non-plural word. It will be classed as common.

The singular mump was actually classed as a common word. As I mentioned before, mump has various obscure dialect usages unrelated to the disease mumps. In future mump will be a rare word. "

Jacki

  • Cryptoverbalist
  • *
  • Posts: 972
    • View Profile
Re: Childhood Diseases
« Reply #19 on: February 24, 2021, 10:20:34 PM »
Mumps common, mump rare. Got it. Thirsty work! Thanks Les.
Late blooming azaleas tricked by the warmer weather into flowering

Calilasseia

  • Cryptoverbalist
  • *
  • Posts: 523
  • Pass the dissection kit ...
    • View Profile
Re: Childhood Diseases
« Reply #20 on: March 08, 2021, 10:48:16 AM »
Can anybody explain why Pat's quote by rogue mother is dated February 05, 1975?!
Is there a spanner in the works?  Or am I seeing things?
Hi Val,

You can dismiss the psychiatrist  :D  You weren't seeing things.

I can't tell you how it happened but I can tell you what produced the result. The first line in the code block is what should have been used. Somehow the 6 at the end got deleted to give the third line.

Code: [Select]
[quote author=rogue_mother link=topic=4308.msg66928#msg66928 date=1608244346]
[/quote]
[quote author=rogue_mother link=topic=4308.msg66928#msg66928 date=160824434]
[/quote]

If you copy the text in the code block to here where it will be executed you get -


I hope to see you back at the ranch sometime soon.

There's a reason for those numbers.

The underlying PHP code references the MySQL UNIX_TIMESTAMP() function. A Unix timestamp is a unique integer, consisting of the number of seconds that has elapsed since midnight on 1st January 1970, which was agreed by convention as the starting point for time measurement when the Unix operating system was developed.

However, there's a problem with the existing Unix timestamp, namely that it's an unsigned 32-bit integer. Which means that the largest value it can take is 4,294,967,295. Therefore, the Unix timestamp cannot handle dates beyond February 7th, 2106. If a 64-bit timestamp is introduced, this will allow integers all the way to 18,​446,​744,​073,​709,​551,​615. A 64-bit timestamp will be good all the way to July 21st, 2554 with nanosecond accuracy, and if used only to 1 second accuracy instead, will be good all the way to the year 584,000,000,000 - around 42 times the current age of the universe. That should be future proof enough for most people's needs, though possibly not those of cosmological physicists :)

Those who want to explore arcane time measurements further, can enjoy the age of the universe in seconds. :)



Remember: if the world's bees disappear, we become extinct with them ...