English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room

4:00 AM

<is coding in PHP> Why?

@tchrist Haha, aww.

Is it that bad?

It's hard for me to compare.

Meanwhile, I managed to do what I wanted, but now I want to write it properly.

> if ( in_array( 'subscriber', (array) $current_user->roles )||in_array( 'contributor', (array) $current_user->roles )||in_array( 'administrator', (array) $current_user->roles ) ) {
echo implode(', ', $current_user->roles) . "\n";
}

This works, but it looks terrible.

Now I'm trying to intersect arrays, or something.

4:16 AM

@Cerberus You're complaining that php looks horrible?

Heh.

I'm complaining because I have to do the same thing thrice.

As well you should.

I'd rather test for all three user roles in one "in_array" action.

It's a code smell.

It's my own code, so it is I who am to blame, not the language...

4:17 AM

But please don't ask me what to do about it. There I do not go.

Don't worry.

The code works as it is; I don't really need it to look proper.

Ah, I've solved it.

I probably forgot some semicolon.

Oh?

> if (array_intersect(array ('subscriber', 'contributor', 'administrator'), $current_user->roles) ) {
echo "Access granted.";
}
Else {
echo "Denied.";
}

Yay you.

Yay, indeed.

6 hours later…

Indranil Bar

10:51 AM

hi sir

2 hours later…

Matt E. Эллен

12:29 PM

@Cerberus noöne knows.

4 hours later…

4:19 PM

[ SmokeDetector ] Possible low-quality post: Where is the wordplay of "A chicken crossing the road is poultry in motion" by Elliott Martinson on english.stackexchange.com

2 hours later…

6:04 PM

[ SmokeDetector ] Request for explanation: Those people are Argentianian or Argentine? by marco on english.stackexchange.com

Shafizadeh

6:30 PM

which one is correct?

- It is correct to me
- It is correct in my opinion

Arrowfar

second one seems right but I would say "I think it is correct".

you could also say "It seems correct (to me)"

Shafizadeh

I see, thx

1 hour later…

7:56 PM

[ SmokeDetector ] Possible low-quality post: Breathe in presennt perfect tense by Brian on english.stackexchange.com

> While you were out there was a phone call for you from Tony Morrison, whoever he is (or whoever he may be).

Does that only denote lack of knowledge, or it has a cast of contempt too?

(I didn't know that Toni Morrison was a famous novelist, so don't take that into consideration)

Anonymous

8:15 PM

@Færd Not sure. Might depend on factors like tone of voice?

Anonymous

Cross-linguistically, deliberate or contextually inappropriate vagueness or non-specificity tends to express contempt.

Thanks.

@snailplane If you wanted it to be surely contemptuous how would you say that you didn't know the person who called?

Anonymous

@Færd Umm, I think you'd want to rephrase it then. Surely you can already think of a number of ways to express contempt toward a person, and I don't have to list them for you? :-)

Yes! I just wanted to know if you would rephrase it for sure.

Anonymous

There was a good chapter about vagueness sometimes expressing contempt by Satoko Suzuki, Pejorative Connotation: A Case of Japanese in Discourse Markers: Description and Theory (1998). Although it's primarily about Japanese, she mentions (for example) the English expression the likes of X as an expression which has "lack of specification" and has "pejorative connotation in certain contexts".

8:35 PM

Good example.

I think whatever has more capacity of being scornful than whichever and who(m)ever.

Mitch

9:11 PM

@snailplane similarly 'of that ilk'

maybe just phonosemantically but still

@Færd "What kind of person would call like this?"

"Who are you?"

Just "Who are you?" might be hurtful enough

"To whom am I speaking?"

or like you're shouting to someone in the room who might have asked you who it is "I have no idea!"

@Færd that is terribly pleonastic, no need for both 'is' and 'may be'.

9:36 PM

Thanks.

@Mitch You mean neither one is needed? and Whoever he suffices? Or whoever alone?

'Cause I can't see where I said there's a need for both.

Anonymous

It looks to me like @Færd was giving two ways to phrase something, and @Mitch interpreted it as a single quote containing both phrasings.

Yeah. I could have been clearer.

Mitch

10:23 PM

@Færd it was all under one quote which I assumed was from somewhere else.

But yes, I thought it was a single quote.

"Tony Morrison, whoever he is"
"Tony Morrison, whoever he may be"
both are contemptuous (dismissing them because unknown to speaker and if unknown must not be that important).

which is funny because she's an important modern author