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: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 07:05:40 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <86tt7lkvnv.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <vrd77d$3nvtf$2@dont-email.me> <868qp1ra5f.fsf@linuxsc.com> <vrdhok$47cb$2@dont-email.me> <20250319115550.0000676f@yahoo.com> <vreuj1$1asii$4@dont-email.me> <vreve4$19klp$2@dont-email.me> <20250319201903.00005452@yahoo.com> <86r02roqdq.fsf@linuxsc.com> <vrh1br$35029$2@dont-email.me> <LRUCP.2$541.0@fx47.iad> <vrh71t$3be42$1@dont-email.me> <874izntt5t.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vrhviu$h5c$1@dont-email.me> <87ecyrs332.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vri9t1$a29t$1@dont-email.me> <20250320171505.221@kylheku.com> <vrif1v$c9ev$3@dont-email.me> <8734f7rw7z.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vrjjvb$1esjh$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 15:05:41 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8c00933fd2fdb83fc14e0f99a9437a0f"; logging-data="101837"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19mS/96WubbSAeCWrnuzH2Qg5G8+Fv+9EE="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hL3Y33ySTYR3XVc3q6LS03eP8oo= sha1:AYqrTygLZPWCTNKReynK7G9cXMc=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:391502

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> On 21/03/2025 01:47, Keith Thompson wrote:
>
>>  I just
>> did a quick test comparing complation times for an empty program
>> with no #include directives and an empty program with #include
>> directives for <stdint.h> and <inttypes.h>.  The difference was
>> about 3 milliseconds.  I quite literally could not care care less.
>
> I'm sorry but that's a really poor attitude, with bad
> consequences.

I'm with Keith on this one, and I expect most other C
developers are also.

> You're saying it doesn't matter how complex a header or
> set of headers is, even when out of proportion to the task.

This paraphrasing doesn't match what Keith said.  Whether
deliberately or not, your interpretation is off base.