this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2024
272 points (98.2% liked)

linuxmemes

21103 readers
1695 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

  • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    It’s actually a technical term in language theory – a term that cannot be produced by the language, but is still considered part of the ‘universe’ (i.e., the set of all terms) is called ‘garbage’ or ‘junk’.

    Since I can’t find a source online to verify this claim, this might just have been the case in my courses…

    [–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

    "Invalid" or "unparseable" are more understandable descriptors in normal language. I don't think I ever heard of garbage/junk being used for that in language theory but it may be domain specific usage.