*This* close - Page 2

Callas <callas@summerblue.net> wrote:
: still_the_same_me@hotmail.com wrote:
:> Callas wrote:

:> I have no idea how you can be going so badly wrong, but
:> you certainly are going badly wrong somewhere.

: Or maybe I'm different?

Maybe, but there's a huge amount of knowledge out there
about how to approach 10-25 mile TT's are your approach is
way, way different.

:> How hard do you ride in this "warm up"?

: Progressively harder, which is why I get faster.

I'd be very interested in seeing how you go for a TT after
doing your two hours and after doing no more than one hour
but with a much more controlled set of changes in intensity.

People are indeed different, but when you are doing
something so very different to the accepted best practice,
I'd wonder.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org "Technolibertarians make a
philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

ajc22@york.ac.uk wrote:
> Callas <callas@summerblue.net> wrote:
> : still_the_same_me@hotmail.com wrote:
> :> Callas wrote:
>
> :> I have no idea how you can be going so badly wrong, but
> :> you certainly are going badly wrong somewhere.
>
> : Or maybe I'm different?
>
> Maybe, but there's a huge amount of knowledge out there
> about how to approach 10-25 mile TT's are your approach is
> way, way different.

*grin*

It hardly so sophisticated as to be an approach. Next
Thursday, when I do the next TT, I'll be warming up for the
first time ever. Warming up for two hours is simply the best
method I yet know of.

> :> How hard do you ride in this "warm up"?
>
> : Progressively harder, which is why I get faster.
>
> I'd be very interested in seeing how you go for a TT after
> doing your two hours and after doing no more than one hour
> but with a much more controlled set of changes in
> intensity.

Me too. I'd have to get used to the riding that intensity
early in a ride; I don't normally do that till some time
has passed.

> People are indeed different, but when you are doing
> something so very different to the accepted best practice,
> I'd wonder.

Don't worry - I don't think this is the best or right
approach; it's merely where I'm starting from.

--
Callas

Callas <callas@summerblue.net> wrote:

: Me too. I'd have to get used to the riding that intensity
: early in a ride; I don't normally do that till some time
: has passed.

It's hard and feels unpleasant. THat's racing. What happens
for me is that if I warm up (30 mins easy, 3 mins hard,
some easy, 2-3 mins hard again then maybe a third set of
2-3 mins hard and easy) the first time I go hard its
unpleasant, I can't get my intensinty right up and I don't
go that quick. Second and third times get better. After
that it impacts on the TT.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org "Technolibertarians make a
philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

ajc22@york.ac.uk wrote:
> Callas <callas@summerblue.net> wrote:
>
> : Me too. I'd have to get used to the riding that
> : intensity early in a ride; I don't normally do that till
> : some time has passed.
>
> It's hard and feels unpleasant. THat's racing. What
> happens for me is that if I warm up (30 mins easy, 3 mins
> hard, some easy, 2-3 mins hard again then maybe a third
> set of 2-3 mins hard and easy) the first time I go hard
> its unpleasant, I can't get my intensinty right up and I
> don't go that quick. Second and third times get better.
> After that it impacts on the TT.

That sounds like my experience. During the course of a long
ride, there come periods of hard exertion, and after some
have passed, the muscles are good to go.

On other matters, I visited your web-site. I didn't know you
were into the C language, Arthur. I'm dedicated to the
language; I started in about 1992, shortly after ANSI C was
published.

--
Callas

Callas <callas@summerblue.net> wrote:

: On other matters, I visited your web-site. I didn't know
: you were into the C language, Arthur. I'm dedicated to the
: language; I started in about 1992, shortly after ANSI C
: was published.

C and Perl. I started C about the same time as you then.
These days it's mainly perl though

--
Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org "Technolibertarians make a
philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

ajc22@york.ac.uk wrote:
> Callas <callas@summerblue.net> wrote:
>
> : On other matters, I visited your web-site. I didn't know
> : you were into the C language, Arthur. I'm dedicated to
> : the language; I started in about 1992, shortly after
> : ANSI C was published.
>
> C and Perl. I started C about the same time as you then.
> These days it's mainly perl though

Ah, I don't like Perl. Had to learn it for work, rather than
of my own violition. Very functional and of great value, but
not something I find enjoyable.

--
Callas

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 19:46:48 +0100, Callas <callas@summerblue.net>
wrote (more or less):

>ajc22@york.ac.uk wrote:
>> Callas <callas@summerblue.net> wrote:
>>
>> : On other matters, I visited your web-site. I didn't
>> : know you were into the C language, Arthur. I'm
>> : dedicated to the language; I started in about 1992,
>> : shortly after ANSI C was published.
>>
>> C and Perl. I started C about the same time as you then.
>> These days it's mainly perl though
>
>Ah, I don't like Perl. Had to learn it for work, rather
>than of my own violition. Very functional and of great
>value, but not something I find enjoyable.

Yeah - for fun, use Ruby.

(p.s. I loved 'violition' in this context. I'm assuming it
was a typo, but I'm still thinking of placing I could
use it in future...)

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

Callas wrote:

> Ah, I don't like Perl. Had to learn it for work, rather
> than of my own violition.
^^^^^^^^^^^^

Violition, eh? I like it. You do something voluntarily, of
your own volition. Somebody forces you to do it, then it's
violition (but presumably only if they actually threaten
violence...)

David.

xlucid@users.sourceforge.remove.this.antispam.net wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 19:46:48 +0100, Callas
> <callas@summerblue.net> wrote (more or less):

> >Ah, I don't like Perl. Had to learn it for work, rather
> >than of my own violition. Very functional and of great
> >value, but not something I find enjoyable.
>
> Yeah - for fun, use Ruby.

I've heard nice things about Ruby.

> (p.s. I loved 'violition' in this context. I'm assuming it
> was a typo, but I'm still thinking of placing I
> could use it in future...)

First invented word this year.

Most recent previous invented word: afterneath.

--
Callas

david@bertenshaw.plus.com wrote:
> Callas wrote:
>
> > Ah, I don't like Perl. Had to learn it for work, rather
> > than of my own violition.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Violition, eh? I like it. You do something voluntarily, of
> your own volition. Somebody forces you to do it, then it's
> violition (but presumably only if they actually threaten
> violence...)

What, like, learn this or we'll fire you? =)

--
Callas

simon@jasmine.org.uk wrote:
> I've been trying to keep out of this thread,

Why?

> but that's too much. The Impractical Distraction and
> Distorting Language could not be less like a functional
> language if it tried[1]. It has, like King John of
> England, no redeeming features and is used only by k3wl
> l33t h4xx0r5 as a means of demonstrating their ability to
> write incomprehensible and unmaintainable gibberish. It is
> probably the only programming language ever designed for
> the illiterate programmer.

I find Perl to be a sort of high level C; you can impliment
a lot of functionality quickly, because the language does so
much for you.

IME, though, Perl is often write once, particularly when all
the shortcuts and abbreviations are used.

--
Callas

In news:1fbbs1-7f3.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk,
Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> typed:
> in message <MPG.1b5b9b77a5a9a56a9898a5@news-
> east.giganews.com>, Callas ('callas@summerblue.net')
> wrote:
>
>> Ah, I don't like Perl. Had to learn it for work, rather
>> than of my own violition. Very functional and of great
>> value, but not something I find enjoyable.
>
> I've been trying to keep out of this thread, but that's
> too much.

I'd better not post how much I've been enjoying using C#
over the past week, then.

It is very readable, though.

A