Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #396684 > unrolled thread
| Started by | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-02-19 16:55 -0500 |
| Last post | 2026-03-16 09:04 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 218 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-02-19 16:55 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> - 2026-02-25 15:56 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-02-26 10:05 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> - 2026-02-26 13:20 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-02-26 17:06 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-02-26 17:27 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-02-26 14:31 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> - 2026-02-26 13:33 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-02-26 18:49 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-02-26 18:55 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-02-26 19:17 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-02-26 19:34 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-02-26 20:01 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-06 10:36 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-06 17:38 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-06 17:48 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-02-27 00:12 +0000
[OT] Bart's scripting language solution (was Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-06 06:37 +0100
Re: [OT] Bart's scripting language solution (was Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-06 15:48 +0000
Re: [OT] Bart's scripting language solution (was Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-06 18:17 +0100
Re: [OT] Bart's scripting language solution (was Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-06 21:46 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-02 00:44 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-02 11:07 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-02 06:35 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-02 17:50 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-02 21:15 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-03 20:48 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-03 22:47 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-04 08:48 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-04 01:07 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-04 12:09 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-04 11:19 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-04 12:58 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-11 11:31 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-04 13:20 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-04 08:30 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-04 14:36 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-04 10:02 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-04 19:27 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-05 13:49 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-05 21:02 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-05 20:39 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-05 19:24 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-05 13:54 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-12 05:50 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-13 11:58 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-13 23:00 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-15 15:54 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-15 23:42 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 12:02 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-15 15:43 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-02 17:40 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-02 21:09 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-03 08:23 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-03 06:20 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-03 23:56 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-03 15:51 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-04 11:45 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-04 07:01 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-11 11:37 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-04 08:29 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-04 16:02 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-04 08:09 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-06 10:34 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-06 08:46 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-04 11:25 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-05 13:46 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-05 21:34 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-05 19:09 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-05 21:12 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-05 14:12 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-05 22:24 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-06 01:00 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-05 15:08 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-05 15:05 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-06 00:18 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-07 22:04 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-08 00:26 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-08 02:45 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-08 17:05 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-11 07:57 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-06 00:12 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-06 00:14 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-05 20:31 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-06 13:51 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-06 08:53 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-06 19:36 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-06 18:14 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-07 18:21 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-07 11:55 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-07 20:10 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-11 10:44 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-07 12:02 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-07 20:14 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-11 10:53 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-07 16:58 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-08 00:35 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-11 08:23 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-08 00:40 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-08 10:42 -0400
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-08 15:18 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-08 12:21 -0400
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-08 19:29 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-09 21:20 -0400
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-10 14:43 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-10 18:08 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Giovanni <lsodgf0@home.net.it> - 2026-03-10 17:18 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-10 16:32 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-10 15:25 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-11 07:07 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-11 13:49 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-10 20:24 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-10 15:29 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-11 00:29 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-11 00:33 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-11 11:04 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-03-10 20:18 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-12 05:37 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-08 17:57 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-08 13:19 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-09 01:12 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-08 21:42 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-08 15:58 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-09 08:09 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-09 08:53 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-09 15:25 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-11 14:40 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-12 05:55 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-08 16:00 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-11 12:44 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-08 17:36 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-08 13:27 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-11 06:33 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-08 12:22 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-11 06:27 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-07 16:43 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-11 07:29 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-11 14:22 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-25 10:07 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 15:54 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-30 03:13 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-06 16:02 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-06 12:11 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-06 13:01 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-06 13:28 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-06 21:53 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-06 22:14 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-07 07:33 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-07 10:24 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-07 19:16 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-07 14:18 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-08 00:47 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-09 22:18 -0400
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-10 10:14 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-11 11:40 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-07 13:33 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-07 14:53 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-07 15:44 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-07 19:53 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-07 10:22 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-11 11:40 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-11 11:00 -0400
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 00:00 +0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-11 18:03 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-11 17:52 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 23:14 +0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:23 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:11 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-05 14:04 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-11 11:36 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-11 11:35 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-03 15:40 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-03 16:23 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-03-04 15:31 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-04 09:38 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-03 16:39 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-03 12:00 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-04 11:44 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-04 17:44 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-04 15:13 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-04 21:07 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-04 23:37 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-05 07:32 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-05 08:23 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-05 02:24 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-05 08:46 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-05 09:52 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-03-05 10:49 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-05 11:03 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-05 15:22 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-05 05:06 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-05 11:13 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-05 14:11 -0500
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-06 03:35 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-05 14:49 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-05 19:27 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-05 19:46 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-03-05 20:50 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-05 22:34 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-06 07:48 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-06 11:49 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-06 13:41 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-06 15:33 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-06 14:42 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-05 13:49 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-06 02:17 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-05 20:06 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-06 14:58 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-06 17:13 +0200
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-06 08:37 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-03 17:29 +0000
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-03 19:20 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-03 16:26 -0800
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-04 05:27 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Opus <ifonly@youknew.org> - 2026-03-04 22:42 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway peter <peter.noreply@tin.it> - 2026-03-14 10:42 +0100
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-15 15:09 -0700
Re: Sort of trivial code challenge - may be interesting to you anyway Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-16 09:04 +0100
Page 3 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 11 Next page →
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-05 21:02 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20260305210212.00005379@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #396787 |
On Thu, 5 Mar 2026 13:49:24 -0500 DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > On 3/4/2026 12:27 PM, Michael S wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Mar 2026 10:02:02 -0500 > > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> To my eye, printing sequential numbers or names by column-row looks > >> better than by row-column. > >> > > > > Were you programming in Fortran in your youth? > > Nah. Never looked at it. > > Is column-row output an option in Fortran? > As far as I know, it isn't. My comment was related to column-major order that Fortran uses for multidimensional arrays.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-05 20:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10ocplm$40gh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #396787 |
On 05/03/2026 18:49, DFS wrote: > On 3/4/2026 12:27 PM, Michael S wrote: >> On Wed, 4 Mar 2026 10:02:02 -0500 >> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> To my eye, printing sequential numbers or names by column-row looks >>> better than by row-column. >>> >> >> Were you programming in Fortran in your youth? > > Nah. Never looked at it. > > Is column-row output an option in Fortran? > > > I programmed internal business software my entire IT career. > > Lotus-1-2-3 macros > dBase, clipper and Paradox (DOS) > ObjectPAL (an offshoot of Delphi used in Borland Paradox for Windows > desktop database) > small amts of Rexx and perl and Java > T-SQL and Oracle PL/SQL > tons of VB and VBA > > hobby coding > PowerBuilder > first C program May 2014 > first Python early 2016 > > > > I like C for raw performance and strictness of code. > > I like python for ease of use and productivity. > > Where else but Python can you get meaningful Usenet stats in 22 lines? > > ------------------------------------------------------- > import sys as y,nntplib as t How many lines would it be without using 'nntplib'? Most of Python's usefulness is due to the availability of lots of different libraries. It is an actual scripting language. (However when I ran your script, it was missing 'nntplib'.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-05 19:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <10od6s3$84n0$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #396794 |
On 3/5/2026 3:39 PM, Bart wrote:
> On 05/03/2026 18:49, DFS wrote:
>> On 3/4/2026 12:27 PM, Michael S wrote:
>> Where else but Python can you get meaningful Usenet stats in 22 lines?
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> import sys as y,nntplib as t
>
> How many lines would it be without using 'nntplib'?
TONS more.
You would go down a level and use Python socket and ssl library code
(which nntplib wraps).
The most handy thing nntplib does for you is return the results of NNTP
calls in python list or dictionary objects.
send the request:
response, data = newsserver.xhdr("From","322356-322365")
valid response comes back from the server:
221 Header or metadata information for From follows (from overview)
data is:
[('322356', 'Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca>'),
('322357', 'Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>'),
('322358', 'Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>'),
('322359', 'Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>'),
('322360', 'Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>'),
('322361', 'Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca>'),
('322362', 'Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com>'),
('322363', 'Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>'),
('322364', 'Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>'),
('322365', 'Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com>')]
If you're interested in python nntplib code, I wrote a lot of it I'll be
glad to share.
> Most of Python's usefulness is due to the availability of lots of
> different libraries. It is an actual scripting language.
>
> (However when I ran your script, it was missing 'nntplib'.)
pip install standard-nntplib should set you straight.
They deprecated nntplib a while ago, but docs as of Python 3.12:
https://docs.python.org/3.12/library/nntplib.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-05 13:54 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <868qc6c582.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #396764 |
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: > On Wed, 4 Mar 2026 10:02:02 -0500 > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > >> To my eye, printing sequential numbers or names by column-row looks >> better than by row-column. > > Were you programming in Fortran in your youth? I did program in Fortran in my youth (and not just my youth), but I prefer the "down the rows first" ordering independent of Fortran, because I find it easier to look for things. Like 'ls' output. Choice of C-style or Fortran-style multidimensional arrays is another kettle of fish entirely.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-12 05:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <865x718b5q.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #396742 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > On 03/03/2026 05:15, Tim Rentsch wrote: [...] >> I see no reason to answer your questions since you seem to have >> no interest in writing C code. > > This kind of challenge can be done in any language. Yes, I understand. You're a self-centered, self-absorbed troll, with no regard for normal newsgroup etiquette. > My algorithm can be trivially converted to C if needed; [...] It could if the earlier language were a known quantity. It isn't. You deliberately post code in a proprietary language, available only to you, to avoid that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 11:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10p0u54$32bhs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #396921 |
On 12/03/2026 12:50, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>
>> On 03/03/2026 05:15, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> [...]
>>> I see no reason to answer your questions since you seem to have
>>> no interest in writing C code.
>>
>> This kind of challenge can be done in any language.
>
> Yes, I understand. You're a self-centered, self-absorbed troll,
> with no regard for normal newsgroup etiquette.
You seem to have no regard whatsover for clear coding guidelines!
>> My algorithm can be trivially converted to C if needed; [...]
>
> It could if the earlier language were a known quantity. It
> isn't. You deliberately post code in a proprietary language,
> available only to you, to avoid that.
Consider it to be pseudo-code, meant to put across an algorithm. It just
happens to valid syntax in my language.
I've looked again at your solution. While technically C, it seems to be
deliberately confuscated.
Basically it is a state machine, which already is a clever enough
approach that it didn't need the silly restrictions. Like banning the
use of 'goto', but using 'longjmp' instead.
I tweaked it to the version below which doesn't use setjmp/longjmp, and
it still appears to work, and is still an FSM. I haven't fixed the
terrible coding style.
Ideally it would just have a loop. (In my languages, there is a feature
called 'doswitch', a looping version of 'switch', as the construct comes
up so frequently. An optimised version automatically uses
multiple-dispatch computed gotos when performance is needed.)
--------------------------------------------
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
typedef size_t Z;
typedef int B;
static Z k, h, w, c;
static int d;
#define GO(x) state = x; goto next
#define NUMBERISH(p) ((p) && *(p) && (p)[ strspn((p),"0123456789") ] == 0)
enum {
START, // the initial state; must be zero
AFU, USAGE, // give suitable message and exit
ROOT, DRAT, // find ceiling( sqrt( cutoff ) ); possible no joy exit
HWC, // display H*W values with cutoff C
FIN, // exit program
};
int
main( int argc, char *argv[] ){
int state=START;
next:
switch (state) {
case START: {
B usage = argc < 2 || argc > 4;
B g1 = argc > 1 && NUMBERISH( argv[1] );
B g2 = argc > 2 && NUMBERISH( argv[2] );
B g3 = argc > 3 && NUMBERISH( argv[3] );
Z a1 = g1 ? strtoul( argv[1], 0, 10 ) : 0;
Z a2 = g2 ? strtoul( argv[2], 0, 10 ) : 0;
Z a3 = g3 ? strtoul( argv[3], 0, 10 ) : 0;
B square = argc == 2 && g1;
B hw = argc == 3 && g1&&g2 && a1&&a2;
B hwc = argc == 4 && g1&&g2 && a1&&a2 && g3;
k = 0;
h = hw || hwc ? a1 : a1/4 + !a1; // note: initial value(h) > 0
w = hw || hwc ? a2 : h;
c = square ? a1 : !hwc ? h*w : a3 > h*w ? h*w : a3;
d = snprintf( 0, 0, "%zu", c );
GO( usage ?USAGE : square ?ROOT : (hw||hwc) && a1&&a2 ?HWC : AFU );
}
case AFU:
printf( " urk... bad arguments\n" );
GO( USAGE );
case USAGE:
printf( " usage:\n" );
printf( " %s cutoff {{for square}}\n", argv[0] );
printf( " %s rows columns [cutoff]\n", argv[0] );
GO( FIN );
case ROOT: {
h = c < 2 ? 1 : c < 5 ? 2 : (h + c/h) / 2;
h += h*h < c;
w = h;
B done = c < 2 || h*h < c+2*h && c <= h*h;
B good = c < 2 || h*h < c+h && c <= h*h;
GO( !done ?ROOT : good ?HWC : DRAT );
}
case DRAT:
printf( " square with cutoff %zu - no joy\n", c );
GO( FIN );
case HWC: {
B eol = k/h + 1 == w;
B end = k+1 + (h>c ? h-c : 0) >= h*w;
Z nextk = eol ? k - (w-1)*h + 1 : k+h;
printf( k < c ? " %*zu" : "", d, k+1 );
printf( c > 0 && eol ? "\n" : "" );
GO( end ?(printf( "------\n" ), FIN) : (k = nextk, HWC) );
}
}
}
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 23:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10p24th$3mc94$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #396971 |
On 13/03/2026 11:58, Bart wrote: > On 12/03/2026 12:50, Tim Rentsch wrote: > I've looked again at your [TR's] solution. While technically C, it seems to be > deliberately confuscated. > > Basically it is a state machine, which already is a clever enough > approach that it didn't need the silly restrictions. Like banning the > use of 'goto', but using 'longjmp' instead. > > I tweaked it to the version below which doesn't use setjmp/longjmp, and > it still appears to work, and is still an FSM. I haven't fixed the > terrible coding style. > > Ideally it would just have a loop. (In my languages, there is a feature > called 'doswitch', I ported this (C version using 'goto') to my scripting language just to see what it would look like: https://github.com/sal55/langs/blob/master/tr.q This doesn't use 'goto', nor conventional loops. However 'doswitch' does loop. An alternative method could use 'recase' (in C terms, jumping directly to a case label). It's just goto 'under the hood', but much less underhand than 'longjmp'. Other ways of control flow include label pointers (also in some C extensions).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-15 15:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <86h5qg66v7.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #396984 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 13/03/2026 11:58, Bart wrote:
>
> [characterizing my earlier code as a finite state machine]
>
>> Ideally it would just have a loop. (In my languages, there is a
>> feature called 'doswitch',
>
> I ported this (C version using 'goto') to my scripting language just
> to see what it would look like:
>
> https://github.com/sal55/langs/blob/master/tr.q
>
> This doesn't use 'goto', nor conventional loops. However 'doswitch'
> does loop.
>
> An alternative method could use 'recase' (in C terms, jumping directly
> to a case label). It's just goto 'under the hood', but much less
> underhand than 'longjmp'.
>
> Other ways of control flow include label pointers (also in some C
> extensions).
None of these more elaborate control structures are needed. The
board display behavior can easily be expressed using conventional
control structures, in standard C:
void
show_board( unsigned height, unsigned width, unsigned cutoff ){
const int D = digits_width( cutoff );
const unsigned R = cutoff < height ? cutoff : height;
unsigned r = 0, c = 0;
while( r < R ){
unsigned v = r + c*height;
if( v < cutoff ) printf( " %*u", D, v+1 );
if( ++c >= width ) putchar( '\n' ), c = 0, r++;
}
}
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-15 23:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10p7g4c$1haut$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397010 |
On 15/03/2026 22:54, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>
>> On 13/03/2026 11:58, Bart wrote:
>>
>> [characterizing my earlier code as a finite state machine]
>>
>>> Ideally it would just have a loop. (In my languages, there is a
>>> feature called 'doswitch',
>>
>> I ported this (C version using 'goto') to my scripting language just
>> to see what it would look like:
>>
>> https://github.com/sal55/langs/blob/master/tr.q
>>
>> This doesn't use 'goto', nor conventional loops. However 'doswitch'
>> does loop.
>>
>> An alternative method could use 'recase' (in C terms, jumping directly
>> to a case label). It's just goto 'under the hood', but much less
>> underhand than 'longjmp'.
>>
>> Other ways of control flow include label pointers (also in some C
>> extensions).
>
> None of these more elaborate control structures are needed. The
> board display behavior can easily be expressed using conventional
> control structures, in standard C:
>
> void
> show_board( unsigned height, unsigned width, unsigned cutoff ){
> const int D = digits_width( cutoff );
> const unsigned R = cutoff < height ? cutoff : height;
> unsigned r = 0, c = 0;
>
> while( r < R ){
> unsigned v = r + c*height;
> if( v < cutoff ) printf( " %*u", D, v+1 );
> if( ++c >= width ) putchar( '\n' ), c = 0, r++;
> }
> }
>
Yes, but you'd prohibited many standard features including loops for
your challenge.
And 'goto' (but allowed 'longjmp' and 'switch'), and 'if' (but allowed
?:). I think even recursion and user-defined functions, other than 'main'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-04-06 12:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <86se97zzcu.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #397011 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 15/03/2026 22:54, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>
>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 13/03/2026 11:58, Bart wrote:
>>>
>>> [characterizing my earlier code as a finite state machine]
>>>
>>>> Ideally it would just have a loop. (In my languages, there is a
>>>> feature called 'doswitch',
>>>
>>> I ported this (C version using 'goto') to my scripting language just
>>> to see what it would look like:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/sal55/langs/blob/master/tr.q
>>>
>>> This doesn't use 'goto', nor conventional loops. However 'doswitch'
>>> does loop.
>>>
>>> An alternative method could use 'recase' (in C terms, jumping directly
>>> to a case label). It's just goto 'under the hood', but much less
>>> underhand than 'longjmp'.
>>>
>>> Other ways of control flow include label pointers (also in some C
>>> extensions).
>>
>> None of these more elaborate control structures are needed. The
>> board display behavior can easily be expressed using conventional
>> control structures, in standard C:
>>
>> void
>> show_board( unsigned height, unsigned width, unsigned cutoff ){
>> const int D = digits_width( cutoff );
>> const unsigned R = cutoff < height ? cutoff : height;
>> unsigned r = 0, c = 0;
>>
>> while( r < R ){
>> unsigned v = r + c*height;
>> if( v < cutoff ) printf( " %*u", D, v+1 );
>> if( ++c >= width ) putchar( '\n' ), c = 0, r++;
>> }
>> }
>
> Yes, but you'd prohibited many standard features including loops for
> your challenge.
I was responding to a context where the prohibitions had already
been violated. I was simply pointing out that if those rules are
going to be ignored then there are easier ways to solve the problem
than importing exotic control structures from other languages.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-15 15:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <86ldfs67e8.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #396971 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > On 12/03/2026 12:50, Tim Rentsch wrote: > >> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >> >>> On 03/03/2026 05:15, Tim Rentsch wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>>> I see no reason to answer your questions since you seem to have >>>> no interest in writing C code. >>> >>> This kind of challenge can be done in any language. >> >> Yes, I understand. You're a self-centered, self-absorbed troll, >> with no regard for normal newsgroup etiquette. > > You seem to have no regard whatsover for clear coding guidelines! I see that you don't like what I've written. Do you have any constructive commentary to offer? Preferably not just statements of personal opinion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-02 17:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <10o53k6$1i0ef$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #396724 |
On 3/2/2026 3:44 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes:
>
>
> A straightfoward exercise. Here is a counter challenge to make
> things more interesting: as above, but don't use nested loops
> (or goto's, etc).
Done.
Does everything in my original challenge, but with no loops:
no for.. while.. do.. goto.. or recursion.
Code bounces back and forth between number generator and number
validator functions.
Plus I figured out a one-line formula for the 'extra credit'!
compile with -lm for the math lib:
$ gcc codefile.c -o programname -lm
==========================================================================================
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
int r, c, num;
int rows, cols, max;
void generate();
void validate();
void generate() {
if (r <= rows && c < cols) {
num = r + (c * rows);
if (num <= max) {
printf("%3d ",num);
}
c++;
validate();
}
}
void validate() {
if (num < (rows * cols) && c < cols) {
generate();
}
else
{
printf("\n");
c = 0;
r++;
if (num < (rows * cols) && c < cols) {
generate();
}
}
}
void extracredit() {
double i,f;
for (int n = 1; n <= 30; n++) {
printf("input = %2d %s\n",n,((modf(sqrt(n), &i) > 0.01 &&
modf(sqrt(n), &i) < 0.50) ) ? "not possible" : "possible");
}
}
int main(void) {
printf("\nCol x Row matrices produced without for.. while... do... or
recursion\n");
printf("------------------------------------------------------------------------\n");
//matrix examples
r = 1; c = 0; num = 0;
printf(" 5 x 5 stop 21\n");
printf("-------------------\n");
rows = 5; cols = 5; max = 21;
generate();
printf("\n\n");
r = 1; c = 0; num = 0;
rows = 5; cols = 20; max = rows * cols;
printf(" 5 x 20 no stop\n");
printf("-------------------\n");
generate();
printf("\n\n");
r = 1; c = 0; num = 0;
rows = 10; cols = 2; max = 19;
printf(" 10 x 2 stop 19\n");
printf("-------------------\n");
generate();
printf("\n\n");
//one-line formula
printf("'Extra Credit': results of one-line formula to determine\n if a
square matrix is possible for the input\n");
printf("--------------------------------------------------------\n");
extracredit();
return 0;
}
==========================================================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-02 21:09 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <86ms0peby6.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #396730 |
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes: > On 3/2/2026 3:44 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote: > >> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes: >> >> >> A straightfoward exercise. Here is a counter challenge to make >> things more interesting: as above, but don't use nested loops >> (or goto's, etc). > > Done. > > Does everything in my original challenge, but with no loops: > no for.. while.. do.. goto.. or recursion. Unfortunately the two functions generate() and validate() are mutually recursive. They may be optimized to use tail-call elimination, but at the source level they are recursive. The latest challenge, which I just got through doing, is to disallow if, for, while, goto, return, and to forbid functions and function calls except for calls to C standard library functions. Also no math library. :) The program is a bit on the long side because of argument processing but the matrix print code is less than 20 lines, including 5 blank lines.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-03 08:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <10o6nci$21m76$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #396733 |
On 3/3/2026 12:09 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote: > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes: > >> On 3/2/2026 3:44 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote: >> >>> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes: >>> >>> >>> A straightfoward exercise. Here is a counter challenge to make >>> things more interesting: as above, but don't use nested loops >>> (or goto's, etc). >> >> Done. >> >> Does everything in my original challenge, but with no loops: >> no for.. while.. do.. goto.. or recursion. > > Unfortunately the two functions generate() and validate() are > mutually recursive. > They may be optimized to use tail-call > elimination, but at the source level they are recursive. "third challenge, write a version that doesn't use for(), while(), do/while(), goto, and also does not have recursive function calls." Recursion means the function calls itself. Thus, my code technically met all the requirements of your third challenge. But I get you. > The latest challenge, which I just got through doing, is to > disallow if, for, while, goto, return, and to forbid functions > and function calls except for calls to C standard library > functions. Yikes! Is main() OK? How about the use of variables? What written languages are allowed? nested ternaries? How deep? > Also no math library. :) Using math.h allowed me to easily create a one-line formula. But I could probably now do it in 3-4 lines without math.h. > The program is a bit on the long side because of argument > processing but the matrix print code is less than 20 lines, > including 5 blank lines. I'll have to bow out for now, but would like to see your latest code. I note that the no-loops challenge was a worthwhile pursuit I never even considered. I think a recursive function could be really short and sweet, so I'm going to try that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-03 06:20 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <86a4wpdmfi.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #396735 |
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes: > On 3/3/2026 12:09 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote: > >> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes: >> >>> On 3/2/2026 3:44 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote: >>> >>>> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes: >>>> >>>> >>>> A straightfoward exercise. Here is a counter challenge to make >>>> things more interesting: as above, but don't use nested loops >>>> (or goto's, etc). >>> >>> Done. I should have added, I appreciate your taking on the challenge. > Recursion means the function calls itself. What you're describing is called direct recursion. The word recursion by itself, without the adjective, includes the case of mutually recursive functions. > [...] > >> The latest challenge, which I just got through doing, is to >> disallow if, for, while, goto, return, and to forbid functions >> and function calls except for calls to C standard library >> functions. > > Yikes! > > Is main() OK? Yes, sorry, not mentioning main() was an oversight on my part. (Still not okay to call it.) > How about the use of variables? Sure. > What written languages are allowed? Standard ISO C. Okay not to be strictly conforming. :) > nested ternaries? How deep? Sure. As deep as you can stand, within reason. My own code sometimes used ?: at the end of another ?: but not in the middle (ie, ... ? ... ? ... : ... : ... never appeared). >> Also no math library. :) > > Using math.h allowed me to easily create a one-line formula. > But I could probably now do it in 3-4 lines without math.h. Yes it isn't hard. >> The program is a bit on the long side because of argument >> processing but the matrix print code is less than 20 lines, >> including 5 blank lines. > > I'll have to bow out for now, but would like to see your latest code. My rule is not to post my own code until others have made a good faith effort on the challenge. > I note that the no-loops challenge was a worthwhile pursuit I never > even considered. Yes, no loops is fun. Once you get used to it, using tail-recursive functions in place of loops often seems like a better choice. > I think a recursive function could be really short and sweet, so I'm > going to try that. By all means. The version I first wrote had two tail-recursive functions, one to find the appropriate number of rows and columns for a given cutoff, and one to show the matrix of values.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-03 23:56 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20260303235636.00007198@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #396736 |
On Tue, 03 Mar 2026 06:20:33 -0800 Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > > My rule is not to post my own code until others have made a good > faith effort on the challenge. > One question before I start thinking: is setjmp/longjmp also diallowed?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-03 15:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <865x7ceakz.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #396744 |
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: > On Tue, 03 Mar 2026 06:20:33 -0800 > Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > >> My rule is not to post my own code until others have made a good >> faith effort on the challenge. > > One question before I start thinking: is setjmp/longjmp also diallowed? setjmp and longjmp are both part of the standard C library, so yes calling them is allowed. (The C standard calls setjmp a macro, but the Synopsis describes it using a function interface, so it seems natural to count it as a function.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-04 11:45 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20260304114541.000060b1@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #396745 |
On Tue, 03 Mar 2026 15:51:08 -0800 Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: > > > On Tue, 03 Mar 2026 06:20:33 -0800 > > Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > > > >> My rule is not to post my own code until others have made a good > >> faith effort on the challenge. > > > > One question before I start thinking: is setjmp/longjmp also > > diallowed? > > setjmp and longjmp are both part of the standard C library, > so yes calling them is allowed. (The C standard calls setjmp > a macro, but the Synopsis describes it using a function > interface, so it seems natural to count it as a function.) If setjmp/longjmp allowed then it's not interesting. No thinking required, just tedious work and attention to details. At least, that's how it looks to me without actually trying.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-04 07:01 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <86pl5jd4ez.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #396751 |
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: > On Tue, 03 Mar 2026 15:51:08 -0800 > Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > >> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: >> >>> On Tue, 03 Mar 2026 06:20:33 -0800 >>> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: >>> >>>> My rule is not to post my own code until others have made a good >>>> faith effort on the challenge. >>> >>> One question before I start thinking: is setjmp/longjmp also >>> diallowed? >> >> setjmp and longjmp are both part of the standard C library, >> so yes calling them is allowed. (The C standard calls setjmp >> a macro, but the Synopsis describes it using a function >> interface, so it seems natural to count it as a function.) > > If setjmp/longjmp allowed then it's not interesting. > No thinking required, just tedious work and attention to details. > At least, that's how it looks to me without actually trying. It's a challenge to make it less tedious. Personally I found that interesting. If other folks have a different reaction that's okay with me. If you try it though you might find it more interesting than you expect; there are some skills to learn, similarly in a way to when doing functional programming for the first time. Or like assembly language programming - I wouldn't do assembly programming now, but I'm glad I went through the process of learning and doing assembly programming all those years ago.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-11 11:37 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <10orglh$10om3$4@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #396744 |
Am 03.03.2026 um 22:56 schrieb Michael S: > On Tue, 03 Mar 2026 06:20:33 -0800 > Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > >> >> My rule is not to post my own code until others have made a good >> faith effort on the challenge. >> > > One question before I start thinking: is setjmp/longjmp also diallowed? Raise a signal when you have a parameter-error and return to the calling function with a siglongjmp(); hrhr.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web