Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!lll-tis!ames!ucbcad!scheme.Berkeley.EDU!sarge
From: sarge@scheme.Berkeley.EDU (Steven Sargent)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: 0 as a magic number
Message-ID: <2216@ucbcad.berkeley.edu>
Date: 21 Jan 88 04:44:25 GMT
References: <5080015@hpfcdc.HP.COM> <39.bagpiper@oxy.UUCP>
Sender: news@ucbcad.berkeley.edu
Lines: 12


Arrrgggh!  You're going about in circles.  Can't we just leave this?

(Alternately:
Clearly 2 is a more fundamental integer than either 0 or 1.  In addition
to symmetrically dividing the numberline, 2 underlies the very concept of
symmetry!  Therefore 2 is the One, True, Good Magical Number.  As to the
One Evil Number: obviously 1858, which in addition to symmetrically dividing
the number line, is also the base year for the Smithsonian Institution
clock.  And we know that the latter is an Illuminati-inspired
conspiracy...)

S.