`re' difficulty?

[Andrew M. Kuchling]

"Tim Peters" <tim_one at email.msn.com> writes:
> That it is.  Is that sufficient basis for buying a book?  I've been toying
> for two decades with writing a lengthy but edifying treatise revealing the
> most surprising floating-point numbers I have been privileged to know ...

This, unsurprisingly, reminds me of a quotation, though one dealing
with integers:

No, I wouldn't go as far as some of my fellow [mental] calculators and
indiscriminately welcome all numbers with open arms: not the horny-handed,
rough-and-tough bully 8 or the sinister 64 or the arrogant, smug,
self-satisfied 36. But I do admit to a very personal affection for the
ingenious, adventurous 26, the magic, versatile 7, the helpful 37, the
fatherly, reliable (if somewhat stodgy) 76...
    -- Hans Eberstark, from the introductory comment to Steven B. Smith's _The
       Great Mental Calculators_ (1983)

I've always wondered why he considered 37 helpful.

-- 
A.M. Kuchling			http://starship.python.net/crew/amk/