Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register


Groups > comp.lang.c > #387017

Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?

From Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?
Date 2024-07-10 13:47 -0700
Organization None to speak of
Message-ID <87le29ug86.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink)
References (16 earlier) <87ed82p28y.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <v6m03l$1tf05$1@dont-email.me> <87r0c1nzjj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <v6m7ae$1v125$1@dont-email.me> <v6ma1d$1vfv2$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 10/07/2024 15:54, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>> Values passed (including values of pointers [used for arrays]) are
>> handled (in the functions) as copies and cannot change the original
>> entities (values or dereferenced objects) in the calling environment.
>> To make it possible to change entities in the calling environment
>> in "C" you have to implement the necessary indirection by pointers.
>
>
> You don't have to do anything at all:
>
>   #include <stdio.h>
>   typedef unsigned char byte;
>   typedef byte vector[4];
>
>   void F(vector a) {
>       a[0]+=3;
>       a[1]+=3;
>   }
>
>   int main(void) {
>       vector v = {10,20,30,40};
>
>       printf("%d %d %d %d\n", v[0], v[1], v[2], v[3]);  // 10 20 30 40
>       F(v);
>       printf("%d %d %d %d\n", v[0], v[1], v[2], v[3]);  // 13 23 30 49
>   }
>
> Here it looks superficially as though 'v' is passed by value (and it
> is of a size that the ABI /would/ pass by value), yet F changes its
> caller's data, perhaps unintentionally.

Here's a modified version of your program:

```
#include <stdio.h>
typedef unsigned char byte;
typedef byte vector[4];

void F(vector a) {
    a[0]+=3;
    a[1]+=3;
    printf("In F\n");
    printf("    a is of type %s\n",
           _Generic(a, vector: "vector", byte*: "byte*"));
    printf("    a        = %p\n", (void*)a);
    printf("    a+1      = %p\n", (void*)(a+1));
    printf("    sizeof a = %zu\n", sizeof a);
    printf("    *a       = %d\n", *a);
}

int main(void) {
    vector v = {10,20,30,40};

    printf("%d %d %d %d\n", v[0], v[1], v[2], v[3]);  // 10 20 30 40
    F(v);
    printf("%d %d %d %d\n", v[0], v[1], v[2], v[3]);  // 13 23 30 49
}
```

The output is:
```
10 20 30 40
In F
    a is of type byte*
    a        = 0x7ffdf0158d44
    a+1      = 0x7ffdf0158d45
    sizeof a = 8
    *a       = 13
13 23 30 40
```
(The pointer values will vary.)

>> Your insistence is amazing. 
> /I/ am amazed at everyone's insistence that there is nothing
> remarkable about this, and that it is nothing at all like
> pass-by-reference.
>
> So, how do I write F in C so that the caller's data is unchanged?

Make a copy of the array data if you need to change a local copy, or
define it as const so the function can't change it, or wrap the array in
a struct.

> Sure, true pass-by-reference has some extra properties, but if I
> wanted to duplicate the behaviour of the above in my language, I have
> to use pass-by-reference.

So your language has pass-by-reference.  Great.  I'm sure we're all very
happy for you.

> In C you get that behaviour anyway (possibly to the surprise of many),
> in a language which only has pass-by-value, and without needing
> explicit pointers.

Yes.

> That really is remarkable. And not unsafe at all!

Yes, it's remarkable.  Yes, it can be unsafe.

It's particularly unsafe for someone who doesn't understand it, perhaps
because they took your advice.

-- 
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 | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar


Thread

technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? aotto1968 <aotto1968@t-online.de> - 2024-07-04 17:16 +0200
  Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-05 01:05 +0000
    Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 02:30 -0500
      Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-05 07:52 +0000
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> - 2024-07-05 09:12 +0042
      Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 01:09 -0700
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-05 08:25 +0000
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 04:19 -0500
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-05 12:20 +0100
            Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 08:28 -0500
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-05 23:40 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 22:30 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-06 19:01 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 13:47 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-06 23:41 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 16:42 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-06 20:04 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 23:28 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-07 12:35 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-07 14:57 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 11:23 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 13:46 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-06 20:15 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 17:01 -0500
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-06 02:24 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 01:39 -0500
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 11:46 -0700
            Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-06 07:23 +0000
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 03:51 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 04:23 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-06 14:26 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 14:33 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-09 16:37 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-09 18:54 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-09 20:03 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 13:23 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 15:38 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 23:55 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-07 10:03 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-07 15:10 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-07 19:22 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-08 00:02 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-08 12:39 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-09 16:31 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-09 15:54 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-09 16:58 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-09 17:29 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-09 18:22 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 14:14 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-10 00:15 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 19:08 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-09 21:28 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-09 14:23 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-10 00:35 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 13:51 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-10 14:32 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 11:26 -0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 15:49 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-10 17:09 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-10 08:48 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-10 20:14 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-10 21:28 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-11 11:13 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-11 08:41 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-11 12:15 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-11 10:02 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 11:17 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-11 12:20 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-11 11:56 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-10 22:49 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 07:02 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 15:19 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 14:29 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 16:42 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 18:30 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-10 21:39 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 20:04 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-11 11:31 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 04:49 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 14:00 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 06:26 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 15:04 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 11:53 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 20:56 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 13:29 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 21:36 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-12 07:53 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 12:03 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:51 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-12 14:36 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 19:13 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 19:32 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-13 11:46 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-13 11:37 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-17 14:42 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-17 19:31 +0200
                Re: Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-07-17 18:49 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 08:46 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-12 12:46 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 19:39 +0100
                Re: Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-07-12 14:17 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:50 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 21:37 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 14:00 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-12 07:54 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:44 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 14:59 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-13 04:39 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 21:04 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-13 11:46 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-13 18:44 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 08:51 -0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 13:26 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 18:29 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 04:28 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 11:54 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 17:48 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-11 00:01 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 01:21 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-11 02:29 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 18:36 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-11 11:54 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 11:04 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-11 13:25 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-11 12:41 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 12:22 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-11 17:58 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 18:25 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 11:27 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-12 08:00 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:12 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 12:21 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-12 12:14 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 09:54 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 15:22 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 08:58 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 19:33 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:38 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-17 16:42 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-12 11:52 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-12 15:35 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-12 15:42 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 15:07 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-12 16:31 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-13 04:49 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-12 15:44 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-13 12:13 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-13 02:01 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-13 04:39 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-13 12:35 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-13 14:43 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-17 12:38 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-17 16:34 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-17 16:56 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-17 19:07 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-17 12:53 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-18 09:46 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-18 05:05 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-18 14:41 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-18 14:00 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-18 18:01 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-18 14:25 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-07-18 22:23 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-18 12:40 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-13 13:35 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-17 01:09 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-12 07:34 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-11 04:35 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-10 16:54 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 16:40 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-10 21:46 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 13:47 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 22:40 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 16:00 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-12 13:38 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-09 22:32 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 00:04 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 16:50 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 01:38 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 18:18 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 11:12 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 13:05 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-10 03:19 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-09 18:31 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 13:05 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-07-09 18:39 +0300
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-07-09 16:20 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 13:55 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-09 16:22 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 16:43 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-10 09:41 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 12:59 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-10 21:52 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-07 22:10 -0500
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-08 00:28 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-08 10:53 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-08 19:01 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-10 04:29 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-09 21:56 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 01:22 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-10 06:05 +0000
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-06 14:28 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-06 19:53 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-10 04:27 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 02:38 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-10 10:58 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 15:45 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-06 21:18 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 18:35 -0700
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 15:23 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-10 05:55 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 03:07 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-10 02:52 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-07-10 11:27 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-10 14:23 +0100
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-06 05:42 +0000
      Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-05 14:31 +0100
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 10:48 -0500
        Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-06 01:38 +0000
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-05 19:00 -0700
            Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-06 04:36 +0200
            Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-06 07:25 +0000
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-07-06 23:24 +0100
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 15:55 -0700
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-06 21:34 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-10 00:57 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-10 03:16 -0400
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-07-11 02:51 +0000
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-07-11 12:46 +0200
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 13:57 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-11 14:50 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-07-11 12:44 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-07-12 12:17 -0700
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-11 12:09 -0400
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-07-06 20:15 -0700
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-07-06 04:29 +0200
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-07-06 01:46 -0400
          Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-06 10:21 +0100
            Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 16:04 -0700
              Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-07-07 01:36 +0100
                Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-07-06 18:39 -0700
      Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? lexi hale <lexi@hale.su> - 2024-07-05 21:54 +0200
  Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-07-07 06:35 +0200
    Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ? aotto1968 <aotto1968@t-online.de> - 2024-07-07 20:29 +0200

csiph-web