I was not going to develop a subject of the Maestro... I know that did not read particulars about sorting, I much that did not read and at all I do not suspect about . Your example to refute probably it does not turn out.
Thanks all for clarification and time found for me.
All flew in a head instantly then I and carried out that verdict more low, it is possible not to read.
[spoiler] to suppose to dispute the end, consider a phrase literally:
"Only it seems to you that it is numbers. And the assumption about" "the Roman number as produces lines possession of the account at level of the first class."
1 sentence read literally, incorrectly, it not seemed to me instants.
2 sentence in the most consistent interpretation:
Sending I assume that it is a question the Roman numbers. Incorrectly, see above.
Sending speech about number (?) sorting as lines, and I so assumed. From this the output about not possession of the account, though Arabian, though Roman, though is for some reason drawn... r-adicheskim. I did not assume that it is a question of numbers, though what. Again, as you understood, an incorrect output. That I wrote about numerical adjustments, I meant especially a point as a separator for normal decimal notation, and that suddenly it somehow affects.
And generally and here any account?
Unique rational grain in 2nd sentence, with .. my ignorance of a subject , could consist that , meeting in the field VI.I, shows "", and that this behavior is connected with NLS. Also that this behavior meant between lines. But also in this case, the output about possession of the account extremely is connected to a hint. And besides, and here the account?
.. The phrase as a whole is "a manure heap", to dig in a k-plenty it is possible only at desire by all means to find pearl grain and at confidence that it there was valid. But so far as the Maestro meant it and so estimated my knowledge here a question, in what period it estimated duration of my digging?
Starting with enough big for a small phrase kol-va unsuccessful sendings, I instantly decided, it is not necessary what to search for depth sense (and already and it is not necessary), and mine the remark in comparison with presumable "assumptions" of the Maestro of me, looks quite innocently and an obvious joke. Try to refute.
Whether and it was necessary to search for depth sense, the author knows only, but to calculate for truth it is improbable, and in cultural community it is better not to continue this subject.