Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?

From	Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?
Date	2024-07-11 04:49 -0700
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<865xtc87yo.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink)
References	(16 earlier) <v6m716$1urj4$1@dont-email.me> <86ikxd8czu.fsf@linuxsc.com> <v6mggd$20g3f$1@dont-email.me> <20240710213910.00000afd@yahoo.com> <v6mm02$21cpb$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> On 10/07/2024 19:39, Michael S wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:30:54 +0100
>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/07/2024 16:48, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>
>>>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>>    >>>> I earlier asked this:
>>>>
>>>>> "So if arrays aren't passed by value in C, and they aren't passed
>>>>> by reference, then how the hell ARE they passed?!"
>>>>
>>>> They aren't.  C allows lots of things to be passed as an argument
>>>> to a function:  several varieties of numeric values, structs,
>>>> unions, and pointers, including both pointers to object types and
>>>> pointers to function types.  C does not have a way for a function
>>>> to take an argument that is either an array or a function.  There
>>>> is a way to take pointers to those things, but not the things
>>>> themselves.  Arrays and functions are second-class values in C.
>>>
>>> That's a good point.  It's not just arrays that can't be passed by
>>> value (because the language says so) but also functions (because its
>>> not meaningful).
>>>
>>> Yet, although pointers to arrays and function can be passed (without
>>> even doing anything special like using &), you are not allowed to say
>>> that anything is passed by reference in C!
>>>
>>> The automatic conversion to a pointer, which is also a feature of
>>> true pass-by-reference, doesn't count.
>>>
>>> Not needing an explicit deref inside the callee (another
>>> characteristic of pass-by-reference) doesn't count either.
>>
>> It does not count, because automatic conversion to a pointer is not
>> something that happens only during parameter passing.  For arrays, it
>> happens in all contexts except sizeof().  For functions, it happens in
>> all contexts except function call.  Or, may be, including function call,
>> in this case (but not in case of arrays) it depends on point of view.
>
> Suppose that was to happen in all contexts, not just for arrays and
> functions, but for all types.
>
> That means that if A, B, C were numbers, then any call such as F(A, B,
> C) would pass the addresses of the numbers rather than their values.
>
> According to what people have said, C would STILL be a language that
> passed thing by value, and never by automatic reference.

First, the scheme that you outline is either dumb or disingenuous
(or perhaps both).

Second, the argument you're making is purely ad hominem:  it
isn't about what is true but about what it is people will say, or
at least what you think they would say.

Third, none of this changes the underlying reality.  Whatever
people might say about your hypothetical scenario, or whatever it
is you think they would say, it doesn't alter the fact that in C
all function arguments are passed by value, and not by reference.

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

Thread

technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? aotto1968 <aotto1968@t-online.de> - 2024-07-04 17:16 +0200
  Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-05 01:05 +0000
    Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 02:30 -0500
      Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-05 07:52 +0000
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> - 2024-07-05 09:12 +0042
      Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 01:09 -0700
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-05 08:25 +0000
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 04:19 -0500
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-05 12:20 +0100
            Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 08:28 -0500
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-05 23:40 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 22:30 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-06 19:01 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 13:47 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-06 23:41 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 16:42 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-06 20:04 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 23:28 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-07 12:35 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-07 14:57 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 11:23 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 13:46 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-06 20:15 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 17:01 -0500
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-06 02:24 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 01:39 -0500
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 11:46 -0700
            Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-06 07:23 +0000
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 03:51 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 04:23 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-06 14:26 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 14:33 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-09 16:37 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-09 18:54 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-09 20:03 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 13:23 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 15:38 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 23:55 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-07 10:03 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-07 15:10 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-07 19:22 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-08 00:02 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-08 12:39 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-09 16:31 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-09 15:54 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-09 16:58 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-09 17:29 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-09 18:22 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 14:14 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-10 00:15 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 19:08 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-09 21:28 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-09 14:23 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-10 00:35 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 13:51 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-10 14:32 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 11:26 -0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 15:49 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-10 17:09 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-10 08:48 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-10 20:14 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-10 21:28 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-11 11:13 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-11 08:41 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-11 12:15 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-11 10:02 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 11:17 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-11 12:20 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-11 11:56 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-10 22:49 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 07:02 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 15:19 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 14:29 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 16:42 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 18:30 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-10 21:39 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 20:04 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-11 11:31 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 04:49 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 14:00 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 06:26 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 15:04 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 11:53 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 20:56 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 13:29 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 21:36 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-12 07:53 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 12:03 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:51 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-12 14:36 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 19:13 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 19:32 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-13 11:46 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-13 11:37 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-17 14:42 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-17 19:31 +0200
                Re: Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-07-17 18:49 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 08:46 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-12 12:46 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 19:39 +0100
                Re: Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-07-12 14:17 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:50 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 21:37 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 14:00 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-12 07:54 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:44 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 14:59 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-13 04:39 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 21:04 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-13 11:46 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-13 18:44 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 08:51 -0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 13:26 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 18:29 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 04:28 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 11:54 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 17:48 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-11 00:01 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 01:21 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-11 02:29 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 18:36 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-11 11:54 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 11:04 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-11 13:25 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-11 12:41 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 12:22 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-11 17:58 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 18:25 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 11:27 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-12 08:00 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:12 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 12:21 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-12 12:14 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 09:54 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 15:22 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 08:58 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 19:33 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:38 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-17 16:42 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-12 11:52 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-12 15:35 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-12 15:42 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 15:07 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-12 16:31 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-13 04:49 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 15:44 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-13 12:13 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-13 02:01 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-13 04:39 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-13 12:35 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-13 14:43 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-17 12:38 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-17 16:34 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-17 16:56 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-17 19:07 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-17 12:53 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-18 09:46 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-18 05:05 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-18 14:41 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-18 14:00 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-18 18:01 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-18 14:25 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-07-18 22:23 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-18 12:40 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-13 13:35 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-17 01:09 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-12 07:34 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 04:35 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-10 16:54 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 16:40 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-10 21:46 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 13:47 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 22:40 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 16:00 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:38 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-09 22:32 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 00:04 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 16:50 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 01:38 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 18:18 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 11:12 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 13:05 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-10 03:19 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-09 18:31 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 13:05 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-09 18:39 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-07-09 16:20 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 13:55 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-09 16:22 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 16:43 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-10 09:41 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 12:59 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-10 21:52 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-07 22:10 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-08 00:28 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-08 10:53 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-08 19:01 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-10 04:29 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 21:56 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 01:22 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-10 06:05 +0000
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-06 14:28 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-06 19:53 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-10 04:27 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 02:38 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 10:58 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-12 15:36 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 15:45 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-06 21:18 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 18:35 -0700
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 15:23 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-10 05:55 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 03:07 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 02:52 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-10 11:27 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-10 14:23 +0100
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-06 05:42 +0000
      Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-05 14:31 +0100
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 10:48 -0500
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-06 01:38 +0000
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 19:00 -0700
            Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-06 04:36 +0200
            Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-06 07:25 +0000
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-06 23:24 +0100
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 15:55 -0700
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-06 21:34 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-10 00:57 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 03:16 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-11 02:51 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-11 12:46 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 13:57 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 14:50 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 12:44 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 12:17 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-11 12:09 -0400
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-06 20:15 -0700
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-06 04:29 +0200
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-06 01:46 -0400
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-06 10:21 +0100
            Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 16:04 -0700
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-07 01:36 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 18:39 -0700
      Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? lexi hale <lexi@hale.su> - 2024-07-05 21:54 +0200
  Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-07-07 06:35 +0200
    Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? aotto1968 <aotto1968@t-online.de> - 2024-07-07 20:29 +0200

csiph-web