Re:Show HN: Interactive ECS Systems/Component Explorer for C...
by cstrahan on Wednesday December 20, 2023 @08:32AM
(#38708445)
> it's one of the first games that is using ECS and that I also have a deep interest into
FWIW, I did read to the end of the line, but I parsed that as two separate assertions (with “and that” being a means to introduce the second assertion):
1) it is one of the first games using ECS
2) that you also have an interest in it
Rather than the intersection of:
1) the set of games using ECS
2) the set of games that you have an interest in
Or, expressed another way, it’s this (how I read it):
(it's one of the first games that is using ECS) and that (I also have a deep interest into)
Vs
it's one of the first games that: (is using ECS) and that (I also have a deep interest into)
I suppose I would have written this:
It’s one of the first games using ECS which I have also had an interest in.
I’m fairly certain I’ve almost always seen something like “[of] which” to introduce another qualifier, whereas “and” almost always introduces a new statement that stands on its own (the exception being in more formal contexts where there’s a sentence structured along the lines of “consider such [insert class of objects here] which are both: [this] and [that]”).
I think it’s the “and that” which threw me (and others here who misread you) off.
FWIW, I did read to the end of the line, but I parsed that as two separate assertions (with “and that” being a means to introduce the second assertion):
1) it is one of the first games using ECS
2) that you also have an interest in it
Rather than the intersection of:
1) the set of games using ECS
2) the set of games that you have an interest in
Or, expressed another way, it’s this (how I read it):
(it's one of the first games that is using ECS) and that (I also have a deep interest into)
Vs
it's one of the first games that: (is using ECS) and that (I also have a deep interest into)
I suppose I would have written this:
It’s one of the first games using ECS which I have also had an interest in.
I’m fairly certain I’ve almost always seen something like “[of] which” to introduce another qualifier, whereas “and” almost always introduces a new statement that stands on its own (the exception being in more formal contexts where there’s a sentence structured along the lines of “consider such [insert class of objects here] which are both: [this] and [that]”).
I think it’s the “and that” which threw me (and others here who misread you) off.