KDE 4.0.0!

[Derek Broughton]

Ignazio Palmisano wrote:

> Derek Broughton wrote:
>> Billie Walsh wrote:
>> 
>>> Sylviane et Perry White wrote:
>>>> On Thursday 17 January 2008 16:24, Wulfy wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>> By synecdoche[0], KDE 4.0 *is* KDE4... to say it's not KDE4 implies
>>>>> it's not even *part* of KDE4, which is patently false...
>>>>>     
>>>> Well... I'm not mankind and that implies I'm not even part of it,
>>>> doesn't it? The OP just meant you can't juge a set from one of its
>>>> parts.
>> 
>> Er, no.  You are not _all_ mankind, yet it's perfectly acceptable to say
>> that you _are_ mankind (odd, yes; archaic, certainly; but still correct).
>> 
>>> However, as there are no other parts at this time, KDE 4.0.0 would the
>>> "whole" of KDE4. Therefore KDE 4.0.0 = KDE4 and KDE4 = KDE 4.0.0 .
>> 
>> Impeccable logic :-)
> 
> Unfortunately it is wrong :) a container is not equal to the things it
> contains, even if it only contains one; the only exception being a
> container which contains itself.
> 
Not buying it.  KDE 4 isn't a container.  At this time, it _is_ KDE 4.0.0.
-- 
derek