Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.lang.c.moderated > #514

Re: Portable/strictly conforming alternative to the "struct hack" (?)

Show all headers | View raw

Árpád Goretity <arpad.goretity@gmail.com> writes:
>> anyone who goes to such lengths to caclulate 1 is unlikley to have 
> discovered something special
>
> Don't insult me.
>
>> that n_hdr expression looks kind of dodgy, basically it evaluates to 1,
>
> How do you know?
>
>> Look at modern C compilers ... 
> this has been perfectly valid, well-behaved C since the 1999 standard: 
>
> Again, I don't like being like an uninformed moron. I know we have
> C99. I just want to support Visual "Crappy" studio which
> doesn't. Hence I can't use C99. That's all.

When you post a followup, your newsreader should automatically
insert an attribution line, so that readers can tell who wrote what.
Please don't delete it.

You quote an article posted by Jasen Betts on September 6, but the
headers indicate that you replied to another article that he posted
on September 11, in which Jasen wrote:

| I am of course wrong - having ignored the "/* other members follow */"
| comment. sorry.

It's possible you didn't see that; this is a moderated group, which can
do funny things with headers and message-ids (and I'm too lazy to track
it down further).

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
-- 
comp.lang.c.moderated - moderation address: clcm@plethora.net -- you must
have an appropriate newsgroups line in your header for your mail to be seen,
or the newsgroup name in square brackets in the subject line.  Sorry.

Back to comp.lang.c.moderated | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

Portable/strictly conforming alternative to the "struct hack" (?) Árpád Goretity <arpad.goretity@gmail.com> - 2013-09-02 04:08 -0500
  Re: Portable/strictly conforming alternative to the "struct hack" (?) Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-09-06 23:24 -0500
    Re: Portable/strictly conforming alternative to the "struct hack" (?) Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-09-11 17:26 -0500
      Re: Portable/strictly conforming alternative to the "struct hack" (?) Árpád Goretity <arpad.goretity@gmail.com> - 2013-10-03 13:37 -0500
        Re: Portable/strictly conforming alternative to the "struct hack" (?) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-10-08 16:38 -0500

csiph-web