Does '!=' equivelent to 'is not' [drifting OT...]

[Paul McGuire]

On Jun 17, 7:09 am, Derek Martin <c... at pizzashack.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 04:33:03AM -0300, Gabriel Genellina wrote:
> > > Basically 'a is b' and 'not(a is b)' is similar to 'id(a) == id(b)'
> > > and 'not(id(a) == id(b))'
>
> > No.
>
<snip>
>
> Saying a flat "no" alone, without qualifying your statement is
> generally interpreted as rude in English...  It's kind of like how you
> talk to children when they're too young to understand the explanation.
> Yucky.
>
Geez, man, this is Usenet.  If you want rude or condescending, the
answer would have been "No, you flatulent moron."  Or maybe the
alarmist, "No! No! No!"

I see the unqualified "No." often on this list, as a short cut for
"Your technical explanation is flawed or has overlooked a critical
point or corner case," and is usually followed by more details further
down in the post to explain what the misconception or oversight was.

Back in my college days, I would not be surprised for a professor to
respond "No." (or worse) if I offered an erroneous explanation to
another student.  The unqualified "No." may be curt, and on a more
sensitive day, one might write "No. (see below)", but as one of the
most informed and careful posters on this list, I'm inclined to give
Gabriel a little slack.

-- Paul