5 ms·
Fifteen? I read that by 1991, latest. It’s nearly thirty. And it’s just what I thought of here: this article has the same simple clarity.
by brians 9y ago
Fifteen? I read that by 1991, latest. It’s nearly thirty. And it’s just what I thought of here: this article has the same simple clarity.
- Someone 9y agoThe second printing I referenced is from 2003. The (presumably) first printing on my bookshelf is from 1990.