Re: C file recoginzed as image file

[Chris Moore]

"Juanma Barranquero" <address@hidden> writes:

> On 1/9/07, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> A contrived example is enough in my book for countering "absolutely,
>> non-ambiguously".
>
> For countering what I was *not* saying, undoubtedly.

So what exactly were you saying?  You actually wrote:

> a file with a .c extension containing a GIF image is absolutely,
> non-ambiguously a GIF

If you meant:
  "a file [...] containing a GIF image absolutely, non-ambiguously
   contains a GIF image",
then that's tautological.  I can't believe that's what you meant to
say.

What I think you meant was:
  "a file [...] which we detect as containing a GIF image is
  absolutely, non-ambiguously a GIF image",
since that makes sense following your previous sentence about people
using non-default file names, and that's the statement which David's
contrived counterexample disproves.