Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault?

Path	csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault?
Date	Fri, 27 Sep 2024 20:34:43 -0700
Organization	None to speak of
Lines	28
Message-ID	<87a5fssb70.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink)
References	<IoGcndcJ1Zm83zb7nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <v8fhhl$232oi$1@dont-email.me> <v8fn2u$243nb$1@dont-email.me> <87jzh0gdru.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v8gte2$2ceis$2@dont-email.me> <20240801174256.890@kylheku.com> <v8i9o8$2oof8$1@dont-email.me> <v8j808$2us0r$1@dont-email.me> <864j7oszhu.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87o75vg9ot.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86ikw1o0h8.fsf@linuxsc.com> <8734n5fjtq.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <868qvc62h7.fsf@linuxsc.com>
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain
Injection-Date	Sat, 28 Sep 2024 05:34:44 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info	dont-email.me; posting-host="c8c9fc6402c712ad7f0cce5d4ec18037"; logging-data="1172312"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18FZrPh/rEvL0qvK/w8pol7"
User-Agent	Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Cancel-Lock	sha1:+DD4GDMFGOVNj76P+quFjNz08bA= sha1:Uo2nrU5GqV0h16rOUqfjlHrUuqw=
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.c:388536

Show key headers only | View raw

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>>> The more C is changed to resemble C++ the worse it becomes.  It
>>> isn't surprising that you like it.
>>
>> I presume that was intended as a personal insult.
>
> It wasn't.

Then you need to work on knowing when you've insulted someone.

For context, since the parent article is from a month and a half
ago, I was discussing a proposal to change a future C standard to
refer to "constants" as "literals".  I mentioned that I think it's
a good idea.

In response, you wrote the above.  The implication is that you
expect me to like ideas that make C worse.  At the time, I took
that as a clear insult.  Thinking about it now, I can only take
your word that it wasn't your intent, but I still don't see how it
could be anything other than a clear insult.

I've considered asking for an explanation, but I don't feel the
need to discuss this further.

-- 
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

Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-27 17:33 -0700
  Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-27 20:34 -0700
    Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-28 07:22 +0200
      Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> - 2024-09-28 17:57 +0000
        Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-28 13:42 -0700
          Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> - 2024-09-28 22:05 +0000
            Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-28 15:17 -0700

csiph-web