Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere

From	Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere
Date	2024-08-28 13:06 -0700
Organization	None to speak of
Message-ID	<875xrkct00.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <vajt3u$2so1b$2@dont-email.me> <pan$bb5a3$9945b524$e24df187$e4a83bac@invalid.invalid> <86o75d1ktx.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87ed69crn5.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86ikvkzn8i.fsf@linuxsc.com>

Show all headers | View raw

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
>> [...]
>>
>>> Not exactly.  There are things that can be done inside a
>>> statement-expression that are not available inside nested
>>> functions or lambdas.
>>
>> And you're not going to tell us what those things are.
>
> As a rule I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who are
> too lazy to think for themselves.  I'm sorry to say that
> class includes you a lot more often than would appear to be
> warrented.

You seem not to be aware of how you come across.

Things like this make you appear arrogant.  You repeatedly make terse
and subtle statements (which are often, but not always, correct) that
would be trivial for you to expand on when you make them.  Instead, you
in effect assign homework to the rest of us.

It turns out that it's possible to jump out of a statement expression.
It was not obvious that that's permitted.  I very rarely use statement
expressions (among other things, they're non-standard), so I haven't
studied them in any detail.  But you expect me to think for myself and
infer that *obviously* they can be used that way.  I don't know how long
it would have taken me to figure that out if I had been motivated to
spend the time on it (it is mentioned in gcc's documentation) , but I'm
reasonably sure it would not have been worth the effort.  And it would
not have surprised me if gcc prohibited jumping out of a statement
expression.

I see from the rest of this thread that I'm not the only one who feels
this way.  Consider the possibility that the problem is not with
everyone else.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

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

Thread

on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-20 18:48 +0200
  Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-20 14:03 -0300
    Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-20 19:18 +0200
      Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-20 19:21 +0200
      Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-20 14:34 -0300
        Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-20 22:18 +0200
    Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-21 04:42 +0000
      Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-21 08:17 -0300
        Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-21 13:34 +0100
          Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-21 10:01 -0300
            Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-21 16:54 +0300
              Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-21 11:21 -0300
        Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-22 08:40 +0000
          Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-22 02:21 -0700
            Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-22 11:29 +0100
              Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-22 11:12 -0700
              Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-22 18:37 +0000
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-23 00:39 +0100
          Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-22 11:00 +0100
            Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-22 08:10 -0300
              Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-22 17:06 +0000
            Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-23 12:47 +0200
              Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-23 12:25 +0100
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-23 13:32 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-23 17:57 +0200
  Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-21 03:30 +0000
    Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-21 09:19 +0100
      Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-21 10:11 +0100
    Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-25 12:40 +0200
      Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-27 06:52 +0000
        Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 10:46 +0200
          Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 11:03 +0200
            Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 11:08 +0200
              Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 11:47 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 11:52 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 13:56 +0200
              Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 20:04 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 20:44 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-27 19:59 +0100
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 21:36 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 22:02 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 23:42 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-09-02 03:32 +0000
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-02 10:53 +0100
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-09-03 04:54 +0000
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-03 06:12 +0000
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-03 12:20 +0300
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-27 21:09 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-29 09:24 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-29 09:37 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-09-03 04:56 +0000
        Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-27 12:28 +0000
          Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-27 18:45 -0700
            Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 19:23 -0700
              Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-28 15:28 +0100
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-28 08:37 -0700
              Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-28 08:22 -0700
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 13:06 -0700
              Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-28 09:31 -0700
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-28 19:39 +0200
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-28 14:34 -0400
                Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 13:06 -0700

csiph-web