In article , "PDQ" wrote:
=20
"Robert Bonomi" wrote in message =
...
| In article ,
| PDQ wrote:
| This is more fun that actually applying myself to wood.
|
| Have you never given any thought to the order of qualification =
inherent
| in the utilization of "of"?
|=20
|=20
| Repeating (since you failed to address it last time):
| =20
| Tell me, just how would you express _in_words_, "root(2) * =
(width*width)"
| then?
| =20
Just for you: root two times width squared.
No "of", just processing.=20
1) do what's left of the "times"
2) do what's right of the "times"
3) multiply the two results together.

Trouble is, that's *not* what "root two times width squared" means. Precedence
of operators, remember? Exponentiation *and* root extraction (which is
simply exponentiation with a fractional exponent) are higher-priority
operations than multiplication, and therefore "root two times width squared"
means (the square root of two) times (the width squared).

Seems you're having trouble grasping the concept, so let's try a simpler
example: solve "four plus three times five".

Do you get thirty-five, or nineteen?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?