Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: transpiling to low level C
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 11:18:07 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <86ikqu9ymo.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <vjlh19$8j4k$1@dont-email.me> <vjn9g5$n0vl$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> <vjnhsq$oh1f$1@dont-email.me> <vjnq5s$pubt$1@dont-email.me> <vjpn29$17jub$1@dont-email.me> <86ikrdg6yq.fsf@linuxsc.com> <vk78it$77aa$1@dont-email.me> <vk8a0e$l8sq$1@paganini.bofh.team> <861pxzftrg.fsf@linuxsc.com> <vk9q7f$nn32$1@paganini.bofh.team>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 20:18:08 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c85db0736692c1a2f18bde6d14efa61c"; logging-data="636537"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/j5d7dnG0jeVhRr0aZHx8K/tqv0QFpzJ8="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Krv6PRj/vnZ80JCGVgmjF+fVvv0= sha1:MSyOxt24KBVAfGjdYgs6tCn3vhI=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:389852

antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) writes:

> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
>
>> antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) writes:
>>
>>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 21.12.2024 02:28, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16.12.2024 00:53, BGB wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pretty much all higher level control flow can be expressed via goto.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A 'goto' may be used but it isn't strictly *necessary*. What *is*
>>>>>> necessary, though, that is an 'if' (some conditional branch), and
>>>>>> either 'goto' or recursive functions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Conditional branches, including 'if', '?:', etc., are not strictly
>>>>> necessary either.
>>>>
>>>> No? - Can you give an example of your statement?
>>>
>>> Look at example that I posted (apparently neither you nor Tim
>>> looked at my posts [...]
>>
>> What makes you think I didn't?
>
> I made the same claim as you earlier and gave examples.  You
> did not acknowledge my posts.  Why?  For me most natural
> explanation is that you did not read them.

You should revise your inference heuristics.  There are any
number of reasons why I might not have referred to your
comments.  Furthermore your conclusion is incorrect.