Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.lang.c > #396240
| Path | csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Bart's Language |
| Date | Tue, 06 Jan 2026 17:12:01 -0800 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Lines | 26 |
| Message-ID | <878qea2plq.fsf@example.invalid> (permalink) |
| References | <vracit$178ka$1@dont-email.me> <vrbo88$1j3e0$1@paganini.bofh.team> <vrbtve$2irc9$1@dont-email.me> <vrc2d5$1jjrf$1@paganini.bofh.team> <vrc4eb$2p28t$1@dont-email.me> <vri6co$26v8m$2@paganini.bofh.team> <87a59fs2xm.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86wmb58mi6.fsf@linuxsc.com> <877c35pa37.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86seciqtxs.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain |
| Injection-Date | Wed, 07 Jan 2026 01:12:02 +0000 (UTC) |
| Injection-Info | dont-email.me; posting-host="6f871b5ffe12a84f74a2becf62529d59"; logging-data="288036"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+/oa5A/tSsYZEv/rGUF6X/" |
| User-Agent | Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:BVaOCQPCgdSwRt9bJUFjMVRxqlA= sha1:4T71yLl57JIifPzNEDR97/kuC0I= |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.c:396240 |
Show key headers only | 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:
[...]
>>> The program can be rejected, but not because of the rule about
>>> terminating a translation. The program can be rejected because
>>> the program is not strictly conforming, and implementations are
>>> not required to accept programs that are not strictly conforming.
>>
>> I disagree, but we've gone over this before with no resolution.
>
> Have you ever offered reasoning to explain your belief, or
> did you give just an unsupported conclusion? Can you explain
> the reasoning that underlies your disagreement?
I believe I have. I'm not interested in resurrecting that old
debate. Past experience indicates that no meaningful resolution
will be reached.
I'll note that you've posted a followup to something I wrote more
than eight months ago. That's one of several reasons I'm not
interested in a discussion.
--
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 | Find similar
Re: Bart's Language Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-01-06 14:04 -0800 Re: Bart's Language Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-01-06 17:12 -0800
csiph-web