Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Call to a function Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 09:02:48 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 50 Message-ID: <86sf58xo7b.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <20230922081706.858@kylheku.com> <87zg1et4wv.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86jzs3de3h.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87h6n7tkv4.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86ttqf2w6p.fsf@linuxsc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f1b36554058883ff18682f96ce8dd084"; logging-data="1390355"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/iiSqkOjjn0WOjHFCV4/RfEUUfq9+yet8=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:dA1GMPdonTxZ68nLodgdI7/tumY= sha1:je7OjuQ5Ltkr2+aw8AxD0lIuPjU= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:379509 James Kuyper writes: > On 2023-11-13 at 11:16, Tim Rentsch wrote: > ... > >> I don't see what it is you are hoping to accomplish with the >> above comments. Can you shed some light on that? > > [long response] I want to address one part of what you said in your two last postings, while I think about how to respond to other parts. In an earlier posting, I wrote: Give a direct answer: "I believe the intent of the C standard allows an implementation not to accept any program that is not strictly conforming. (When you say reject I'm assuming you mean the opposite of accept.)" Just those two sentences, and nothing more. When I say "the intent of the C standard", that is a stand-in for a longer phrasing along the lines of "the intended meaning of the C standard" or "the intent of the C standard's authors". When I say "I believe ..." I mean it in the same way that I might say "I believe the Riemann Hypothesis is true." That is, I am making a statement about a question of fact, expressing a belief about the answer to the question, without having proof or otherwise convincing evidence. To give a contrast, I do not mean "I believe ..." as addressing a question of faith or a question of opinion. For example, "I believe God exists" is a statement about a question of faith; answers to questions of faith are unknowable, more or less by definition, except by having faith. Do you understand what I'm saying in those last three paragraphs? Or is there something you're unsure about or find confusing? When reading a statement or a question from someone, it's imporant to understand what the writer thinks about what the statement or question means. Similarly, when writing a statement or a question for another person or persons, it's important to express what one hopes to communicate in a way that will be understood by the expected or intended audience as having the same meaning as what the writer hopes to convey. Does this last paragraph make sense? Would you say you agree with it?