Sharps knives are only safer when in use. At rest in a drawer, or tub of soapy water, dull knives are safer. I don't see how that's applicable, though :-P >

Sharps knives are only safer when in use. At rest in a drawer, or tub of soapy water, dull knives are safer. I don't see how that's applicable, though :-P > The question is natural for how it truncates. It so happens the answer is by stopping. You imply it should do so by altering the string. I can see arguments either way. So can I, and I think that's the distinction I draw. Something is nonsensical if I really can't see any arguments for it. It's counterfactual if things could reasonably have gone that way but didn't. > For the rest, Truncation is a form of corruption. So I'm not sure where you are taking that line. Was it just my rhetoric? Truncation is, indeed, a form of corruption. It is perhaps acceptable in more circumstances than other forms of corruption. It wasn't exactly that I thought, from your rhetoric, that you were referring to something else. But on the off chance you were, I definitely wanted to know about it.