Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c > #386775

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

From Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?
Date 2024-07-05 12:20 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <87plrsultu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink)
References <v66eci$2qeee$1@dont-email.me> <v67gt1$2vq6a$2@dont-email.me> <v687h2$36i6p$1@dont-email.me> <871q48w98e.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v68dsm$37sg2$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> writes:

> On 7/5/2024 3:09 AM, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On 7/4/2024 8:05 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> It’s called “Rust”.
>>>
>>>
>>> If anything, I suspect may make sense to go a different direction:
>>>    Not to a bigger language, but to a more narrowly defined language.
>>>
>>> Basically, to try to distill what C does well, keeping its core
>>> essence intact.
>>>
>>>
>>> Goal would be to make it easier to get more consistent behavior across
>>> implementations, and also to make it simpler to implement (vs an
>>> actual C compiler); with a sub-goal to allow for implementing a
>>> compiler within a small memory footprint (as would be possible for K&R
>>> or C89).
>>>
>>>
>>> Say for example:
>>>    Integer type sizes are defined;
>>>    Nominally, integers are:
>>>      Twos complement;
>>>      Little endian;
>>>      Wrap on overflow.
>>>    Dropped features:
>>>      VLAs
>>>      Multidimensional arrays (*1)
>>>      Bitfields
>>>      ...
>>>    Simplified declaration syntax (*2):
>>>      {Modifier|Attribute}* TypeName Declarator
>>>
>>>
>>> *1: While not exactly that rare, and can be useful, it is debatable if
>>>   they add enough to really justify their complexity and relative
>>>   semantic fragility. If using pointers, one almost invariably needs to
>>>   fall back to doing "arr[y*N+x]" or similar anyways, so it is arguable
>>>   that it could make sense to drop them and have people always do their
>>>   multidimensional indexing manually.
>>>
>>> Note that multidimensional indexing via multiple levels of pointer
>>> indirection would not be effected by this.
>> [...]
>> Multidimensional arrays in C are not a distinct language feature.
>> They are simply arrays of arrays, and all operations on them follow
>> from operations on ordinary arrays and pointers.
>> Are you proposing (in this hypothetical new language) to add
>> an arbitrary restriction, so that arrays can have elements of
>> arithmetic, pointer, struct, etc. type, but not of array type?
>> I'm not sure I see the point.
>
> As-is, the multidimensional arrays require the compiler to realize that it
> needs to multiply one index by the product of all following indices.
>
> So, say:
>   int a[4][4];
>    int j, k, l;
>    l=a[j][k];
>
> Essentially needs to be internally translated to, say:
>    l=a[j*4+k];
>
> Eliminating multidimensional arrays eliminates the need for this
> translation logic, and the need to be able to represent this case in the
> typesystem handling logic (which is, as I see it, in some ways very
> different from what one needs for a struct).

How can it be eliminated?  All your plan does is force me to wrap the
inner array in a struct in order to get anything like the convenience of
the above:

struct a { int a[4]; };

struct a a[4];
l = a[j].a[k];

Most compilers with generate the same arithmetic (indeed exactly the
same code) for this as for the more convenient from that you don't like.

All you can do to eliminate this code generation is to make it so hard
to re-write the convenient code you dislike.  (And yes, I used the same
name all over the place because you are forcing me to.)

> While eliminating structs could also simplify things; structs also tend to
> be a lot more useful.

Indeed.  And I'd have to use them for this!

-- 
Ben.

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