From owner-freebsd-current Mon Aug 26 16:04:08 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA22729 for current-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:04:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from PACBELL.net (chumash.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.17]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA22724 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:04:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [206.170.0.31] (ppp-206-170-0-31.snfc21.pacbell.net [206.170.0.31]) by PACBELL.net (8.7.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA20421; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:00:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:04:14 -0700 To: terry@lambert.org From: leonard@pacbell.net (Leonard Chung) Subject: Re: new gcc Cc: current@freebsd.org Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >It is not nearly so funny as the misuse of "moot". > >Everyone says "it's a moot point" to mean "it's not worthy of discussion" >when they are trying to sound intellectual. Look it up -- "moot" means >"subject to discussion". I looked up "moot" in my dictionary, and it defines "moot" as "subject to debate; arguable." However, it also says that in the context of law, "moot" means "a. Lacking legal significance, though having been previously decided or settled. b. Of no practical importance; academic." The use of "a moot point" seems to be correct under the context of law... Leonard