Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #399456 > unrolled thread
| Started by | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-05-27 19:53 +0200 |
| Last post | 2026-05-30 11:18 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 203 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
this girl calls c ugly fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-05-27 19:53 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-05-27 20:15 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-27 18:49 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-28 04:53 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-28 02:35 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-28 23:32 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-28 20:07 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-05-28 11:48 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-28 09:18 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-28 04:57 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-28 23:35 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 09:52 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 05:20 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-29 13:22 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 15:16 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-30 13:52 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-30 14:40 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-30 16:36 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-30 15:48 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-31 11:14 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-31 13:25 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-31 22:14 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 15:22 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-30 03:49 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-28 12:47 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 09:56 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 11:00 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-05-28 17:12 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-28 14:07 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-28 23:54 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 10:02 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 12:19 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 14:46 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 14:22 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 17:15 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-05-29 15:59 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 17:12 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 18:48 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 19:09 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 22:00 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 22:14 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 12:09 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 17:05 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 18:34 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-05-29 19:29 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 18:53 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 12:28 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 20:49 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 22:03 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 13:56 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 22:54 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 15:52 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2026-05-29 20:31 -0400
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-30 02:03 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 19:02 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-30 12:12 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-05-30 12:29 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-30 13:56 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-30 16:43 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-31 03:37 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-30 19:53 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-02 12:16 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-31 11:47 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-02 12:55 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-05-31 09:12 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-31 11:49 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-31 11:10 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-31 13:18 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2026-05-31 10:24 -0400
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-31 17:35 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2026-05-31 12:46 -0400
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-31 22:24 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2026-05-31 18:26 -0400
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-01 08:28 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-31 15:54 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-01 08:39 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-01 02:33 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-02 11:48 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2026-06-02 06:37 -0400
Constants and undefined behavior Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-06-02 05:06 -0700
Re: Constants and undefined behavior cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-02 16:28 +0000
Re: Constants and undefined behavior Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-06-04 03:37 -0700
Re: Constants and undefined behavior cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-04 16:31 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-02 05:35 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-06-02 06:29 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-02 16:10 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-02 15:29 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-06-02 13:59 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-02 13:05 +0000
Parentheses (was: this girl calls c ugly) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-02 14:38 +0100
Re: Parentheses (was: this girl calls c ugly) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-02 15:19 +0000
Re: Parentheses antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-06-03 22:30 +0000
Re: Parentheses Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-03 16:24 -0700
Re: Parentheses antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-06-04 02:03 +0000
Re: Parentheses Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-04 01:12 +0100
Re: Parentheses antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-06-04 01:58 +0000
Re: Parentheses Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-04 11:37 +0100
Re: Parentheses cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-04 10:51 +0000
Re: Parentheses Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-04 12:47 +0100
Re: Parentheses Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-04 14:57 +0200
Re: Parentheses cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-04 14:31 +0000
[OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-02 15:54 +0200
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-02 15:19 +0100
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-02 15:19 +0000
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-02 17:39 +0200
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-02 16:36 +0000
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-02 21:33 +0000
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-06-02 14:43 -0700
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-06-02 17:08 +0000
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-02 19:19 +0000
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-04 00:11 +0000
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-02 15:39 -0700
Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-03 13:14 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-02 15:10 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-02 15:31 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2026-05-31 10:15 -0400
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-31 16:29 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-31 03:45 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-31 04:02 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-05-31 09:04 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-31 18:11 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-05-31 19:34 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-05-31 19:10 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-01 11:12 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-01 12:36 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-01 14:26 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-06-04 02:34 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-04 12:40 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-04 14:35 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-04 14:18 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-04 15:47 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-04 15:57 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-04 16:27 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-04 16:46 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-04 20:15 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-04 20:54 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-04 16:18 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-04 17:23 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-04 16:47 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-04 19:47 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-06-04 18:45 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-04 15:21 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-06-04 06:38 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-01 09:52 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-01 02:42 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-01 12:50 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-01 11:47 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-01 12:55 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-01 14:39 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-01 15:11 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-02 08:41 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-02 02:07 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-02 11:38 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-02 05:01 -0700
It is not futile to change the subject line (Was: this girl calls c ugly) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-06-02 12:39 +0000
Re: It is not futile to change the subject line (Was: this girl calls c ugly) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-06-02 12:42 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-02 11:46 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-02 11:09 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-02 05:25 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-02 14:20 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-02 15:12 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-06-02 04:16 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-06-01 15:23 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-06-01 16:06 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-01 23:24 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-06-02 11:35 +0200
Operator precedence in other (non-C, but "C-like") languages (Was: something about a girl) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-06-02 12:36 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-01 11:04 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-01 14:04 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-01 18:48 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-01 21:04 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-02 09:17 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-02 09:09 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-02 12:07 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-06-02 14:37 +0200
Microcontroller software stacks (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-02 15:06 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-06-04 03:58 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-05-31 19:11 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-05-31 16:08 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-31 16:32 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-05-31 17:12 -0700
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-30 14:07 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 18:10 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 19:18 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 22:17 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-29 21:47 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2026-05-29 15:57 -0400
Re: this girl calls c ugly Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-29 22:34 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-29 23:18 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-30 01:26 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-30 04:25 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-30 12:01 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-31 00:29 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-31 10:59 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-01 00:33 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-06-01 02:26 +0100
Re: this girl calls c ugly David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-05-31 13:24 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 08:09 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 04:15 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-05-29 14:58 +0200
Re: this girl calls c ugly BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2026-05-30 01:04 -0500
Re: this girl calls c ugly Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-29 23:20 +0000
Re: this girl calls c ugly Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-05-30 11:18 +0200
Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
| From | cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-04 14:31 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Parentheses |
| Message-ID | <10vs282$ue$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #399679 |
In article <10vrojq$bjmf$2@dont-email.me>, Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>On 04/06/2026 11:51, Dan Cross wrote:
>> In article <10vqftg$2d72$1@dont-email.me>, Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>> On 03/06/2026 23:30, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>>>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I don't have much use for CSTs for a normal compiler, but
>>>>> they might be useful for source-to-source translators, or programs that
>>>>> do source refactoring, where you want to preserve extras such as
>>>>> parentheses even if they're not strictly needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Injecting the right parentheses for examples like `(a + b) * c' which
>>>>> would have an AST like '(* (+ a b) c)' is surpringly tricky. Easier to
>>>>> just follow the original source!
>>>>
>>>> You probably mean some more complicated example. This one is
>>>> easy:
>>>>
>>>> (10) -> parse("(a + b) * c")
>>>>
>>>> (10) (* (+ a b) c)
>>>>
>>>> (11) -> unparse(parse("(a + b) * c"))
>>>>
>>>> (11) "(a+b)*c"
>>>>
>>>> (12) -> parse("a + b * c")
>>>>
>>>> (12) (+ a (* b c))
>>>>
>>>> (13) -> unparse(parse("a + b * c"))
>>>>
>>>> (13) "a+b*c"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You just need to track priorities of subexpressions to produce the
>>>> above: '+' has lower priority than '*' so subexpression needs
>>>> parentheses, '*' has higher priority, so there is no need for
>>>> parentheses.
>>>
>>> I seem to remember one problem was with minus, for example original expr is:
>>>
>>> a - (b - c)
>>>
>>> The AST is (- a (- b c)), but a simplistic approach would generate, from
>>> either that or (- (- a b) c), the same output:
>>>
>>> a - b - c
>>>
>>> No parentheses because the the two "-" have the same precedence. The
>>> example might have been 'a + (b - c)'; same thing.
>>>
>>> It just seemed more trouble than it was worth.
>>
>> What? I don't understand what you're saying at all.
>
>This is about turning AST (which has stripped parentheses) back into the
>original source text.
>
>I was responding to 'You just need to track priorities of
>subexpressions', with an example where the two operators had the same
>priorities.
>
>It would extra work to generate the parentheses needed to make the
>output correct. For my application, I decided not to be bother.
I remain mystified as to your point. The two ASTs presented
as S-expressions above are different: `(- a (- b c))` is simply
not the same as `(- (- a b) c)`. If a program that turns these
"back into the original source text" produces `a - b - c` for
both, then it is simply broken. `a - b - c` matches the the AST
`(- (- a b) c)`, but manifestly does not match `(- a (- b c))`.
- Dan C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 15:54 +0200 |
| Subject | [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <10vmna7$3uus8$13@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #399623 |
On 2026-06-02 15:05, Dan Cross wrote: > [...] > > ┌──────┐ > │ expr │ > └──────┘ > ╱ │ ╲ > ╱ │ ╲ > ┌──────┐ . ┌─────┐ > │ expr │ (+) │term │ > └──────┘ ' └─────┘ > │ │ > │ │ > ┌─────┐ ┌─────┐ > │term │ │ident│ > └─────┘ └─────┘ > ╱ │ ╲ │ > ╱ │ ╲ │ > ┌─────┐ . ┌─────┐ .─. > │ident│ (*) │ident│ (`c`) > └─────┘ ' └─────┘ `─' > │ │ > │ │ > .─. .─. > (`a`) (`b`) > `─' `─' > > [...] I suppose you have some tool to create those fancy graphics? What are you using for that? - Or is that all hand-crafted? Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 15:19 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <10vmoph$2utb2$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #399627 |
On 02/06/2026 14:54, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > On 2026-06-02 15:05, Dan Cross wrote: >> [...] >> >> ┌──────┐ >> │ expr │ >> └──────┘ >> ╱ │ ╲ >> ╱ │ ╲ >> ┌──────┐ . ┌─────┐ >> │ expr │ (+) │term │ >> └──────┘ ' └─────┘ >> │ │ >> │ │ >> ┌─────┐ ┌─────┐ >> │term │ │ident│ >> └─────┘ └─────┘ >> ╱ │ ╲ │ >> ╱ │ ╲ │ >> ┌─────┐ . ┌─────┐ .─. >> │ident│ (*) │ident│ (`c`) >> └─────┘ ' └─────┘ `─' >> │ │ >> │ │ >> .─. .─. >> (`a`) (`b`) >> `─' `─' >> >> [...] > > I suppose you have some tool to create those fancy graphics? > What are you using for that? - Or is that all hand-crafted? The rectangles are just using box-drawing characters. Most times I use them, they have small spaces between the lines, but here on Thunderbird there are no spaces. Conversely, if I post the above to a Github .md file, then I see spaces. The rest is just clever ASCII art.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 15:19 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <10vmsas$cev$3@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #399627 |
In article <10vmna7$3uus8$13@dont-email.me>, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >On 2026-06-02 15:05, Dan Cross wrote: >> [...] >> >> ┌──────┐ >> │ expr │ >> └──────┘ >> ╱ │ ╲ >> ╱ │ ╲ >> ┌──────┐ . ┌─────┐ >> │ expr │ (+) │term │ >> └──────┘ ' └─────┘ >> │ │ >> │ │ >> ┌─────┐ ┌─────┐ >> │term │ │ident│ >> └─────┘ └─────┘ >> ╱ │ ╲ │ >> ╱ │ ╲ │ >> ┌─────┐ . ┌─────┐ .─. >> │ident│ (*) │ident│ (`c`) >> └─────┘ ' └─────┘ `─' >> │ │ >> │ │ >> .─. .─. >> (`a`) (`b`) >> `─' `─' >> >> [...] > >I suppose you have some tool to create those fancy graphics? >What are you using for that? - Or is that all hand-crafted? I used, "monodraw" on the Mac. I can't do that by hand; I am not artistically gifted. :-) - Dan C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 17:39 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <10vmtgc$3uus8$14@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #399633 |
On 2026-06-02 17:19, Dan Cross wrote: > In article <10vmna7$3uus8$13@dont-email.me>, > Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >> On 2026-06-02 15:05, Dan Cross wrote: >>> [...] >> >> I suppose you have some tool to create those fancy graphics? >> What are you using for that? - Or is that all hand-crafted? > > I used, "monodraw" on the Mac. I can't do that by hand; I am > not artistically gifted. :-) What a pity that it's not available for Linux. Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 16:36 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <10vn0pv$ghg$2@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #399635 |
In article <10vmtgc$3uus8$14@dont-email.me>, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >On 2026-06-02 17:19, Dan Cross wrote: >> In article <10vmna7$3uus8$13@dont-email.me>, >> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> On 2026-06-02 15:05, Dan Cross wrote: >>>> [...] >>> >>> I suppose you have some tool to create those fancy graphics? >>> What are you using for that? - Or is that all hand-crafted? >> >> I used, "monodraw" on the Mac. I can't do that by hand; I am >> not artistically gifted. :-) > >What a pity that it's not available for Linux. Not related to C, but there are alternatives; `MonoSketch` looks similar. https://github.com/tuanchauict/MonoSketch AsciiFlow and ASCII Draw are also alternatives. - Dan C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 21:33 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <B_HTR.9651$9P1.6865@fx36.iad> |
| In reply to | #399637 |
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes: >In article <10vmtgc$3uus8$14@dont-email.me>, >Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >>On 2026-06-02 17:19, Dan Cross wrote: >>> In article <10vmna7$3uus8$13@dont-email.me>, >>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 2026-06-02 15:05, Dan Cross wrote: >>>>> [...] >>>> >>>> I suppose you have some tool to create those fancy graphics? >>>> What are you using for that? - Or is that all hand-crafted? >>> >>> I used, "monodraw" on the Mac. I can't do that by hand; I am >>> not artistically gifted. :-) >> >>What a pity that it's not available for Linux. > >Not related to C, but there are alternatives; `MonoSketch` looks >similar. https://github.com/tuanchauict/MonoSketch > >AsciiFlow and ASCII Draw are also alternatives. > Conversation with google AI: Query: troff macros for flowcharts The AI responded with an example: .PS box "Start" arrow box "Read Data" arrow diamond "Valid?" arrow "Yes" right box "Process" arrow up move from last box .s to 0.5 below last diamond arrow from diamond to last position "No" arrow box "Stop" .PE Query: pic command complains aboue "Valid?" Answer: You are completely right. Standard pic will choke on diamond "Valid?" because diamond does not natively accept text string arguments the same way a box or circle does. It evaluates "Valid?" as an unexpected modifier. New example: .PS box "Start" arrow box "Read Data" arrow diamond # Clear the text string out of this line "Valid?" at last diamond arrow "Yes" right box "Process" arrow up move from last box .s to 0.5 below last diamond arrow from last diamond to last position "No" arrow box "Stop" .PE Query: PIC still complains about line 7 Answer: The issue is that standard pic parser grammar is very particular about relative positioning syntax. After several more subsequent failed attempts to create a valid PIC, I dug out my AT&T Documenter's Workbench User's Guide, and of course, there is no 'diamond' primitive. Query: pci does not have "diamond". Try again. Answer: You are completely correct, and I apologize for Hallucinating that keyword. pic does not have a diamond primitive. The primitive shapes are strictly limited to box, circle, ellipse, line, arrow, arc, and spline. So much for artifical intelligence built on scraping the web.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 14:43 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <10vnipk$37tjr$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #399645 |
On 6/2/2026 2:33 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes: >> In article <10vmtgc$3uus8$14@dont-email.me>, >> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> On 2026-06-02 17:19, Dan Cross wrote: >>>> In article <10vmna7$3uus8$13@dont-email.me>, >>>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 2026-06-02 15:05, Dan Cross wrote: >>>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> I suppose you have some tool to create those fancy graphics? >>>>> What are you using for that? - Or is that all hand-crafted? >>>> >>>> I used, "monodraw" on the Mac. I can't do that by hand; I am >>>> not artistically gifted. :-) >>> >>> What a pity that it's not available for Linux. >> >> Not related to C, but there are alternatives; `MonoSketch` looks >> similar. https://github.com/tuanchauict/MonoSketch >> >> AsciiFlow and ASCII Draw are also alternatives. >> > > Conversation with google AI: > > Query: troff macros for flowcharts > > The AI responded with an example: > > .PS > box "Start" > arrow > box "Read Data" > arrow > diamond "Valid?" > arrow "Yes" right > box "Process" > arrow up > move from last box .s to 0.5 below last diamond > arrow from diamond to last position "No" > arrow > box "Stop" > .PE > > Query: pic command complains aboue "Valid?" > > Answer: > You are completely right. Standard pic will choke on diamond > "Valid?" because diamond does not natively accept text string > arguments the same way a box or circle does. It evaluates > "Valid?" as an unexpected modifier. New example: > > .PS > box "Start" > arrow > box "Read Data" > arrow > diamond # Clear the text string out of this line > "Valid?" at last diamond > arrow "Yes" right > box "Process" > arrow up > move from last box .s to 0.5 below last diamond > arrow from last diamond to last position "No" > arrow > box "Stop" > .PE > > Query: PIC still complains about line 7 > > Answer: > > The issue is that standard pic parser grammar is very particular > about relative positioning syntax. > > > After several more subsequent failed attempts to create a valid PIC, > I dug out my AT&T Documenter's Workbench User's Guide, and > of course, there is no 'diamond' primitive. > > Query: pci does not have "diamond". Try again. > > Answer: > > You are completely correct, and I apologize for Hallucinating > that keyword. pic does not have a diamond primitive. The > primitive shapes are strictly limited to box, circle, ellipse, > line, arrow, arc, and spline. > > > So much for artifical intelligence built on scraping the web. Scary aspect... Somebody trusting the code it dumps out of its hind end... Runs it. Say its in a server loop... Oh my!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 17:08 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <ASCII-20260602180622@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> |
| In reply to | #399633 |
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote or quoted:
>I used, "monodraw" on the Mac. I can't do that by hand; I am
>not artistically gifted. :-)
I have been searching for an ASCII-to-ASCII program for a long
time and never found anything impressive. I want to write
a /description/ of my diagram in ASCII and then want to get
my diagram as ASCII. Dot, ditaa, nothing worked.
The least bad solution I found so far is called /PlantUML/.
example.puml
@startuml
skinparam componentStyle rectangle
interface "SAX interface" as SAX_interface
interface "internal structure" as internal_structure
interface "internal HTML" as internal_HTML
interface "external HTML" as external_HTML
interface "external LaTeX" as external_LaTeX
Text --> [Parser]
[Parser] --> SAX_interface
SAX_interface --> [struct creator]
[struct creator] --> internal_structure
internal_structure --> [internal HTML transformer]
[internal HTML transformer] --> internal_HTML
internal_HTML --> [external HTML transformer]
[external HTML transformer] --> external_HTML
internal_structure --> [external LaTeX transformer]
[external LaTeX transformer] --> external_LaTeX
@enduml
example.cmd
set "GRAPHVIZ_DOT=C:\example\dot.exe"
"C:\example\java.exe" -jar "C:\example\plantuml.jar" -txt "example.puml"
output (not edited)
,----.
|Text|
|----|
`----'
|
|
,------.
|Parser|
|------|
`------'
|
,-------------.
|SAX interface|
|-------------|
`-------------'
|
,--------------.
|struct creator|
|--------------|
`--------------'
|
,------------------.
|internal structure|
|------------------|
`------------------'
,-------------------------. ,--------------------------.
|internal HTML transformer| |external LaTeX transformer|
|-------------------------| |--------------------------|
`-------------------------' `--------------------------'
| |
| |
,-------------. ,--------------.
|internal HTML| |external LaTeX|
|-------------| |--------------|
`-------------' `--------------'
|
,-------------------------.
|external HTML transformer|
|-------------------------|
`-------------------------'
|
,-------------.
|external HTML|
|-------------|
`-------------'
This is nothing impressive, but I am not aware of any other
program that can do this! You can then tweak it manually
if you've got the time:
.------.
(Markdown)
'------'
|
V
.------.
|Parser|
'------'
|
V
.-----------.
(SAX interface)
'-----------'
|
V
.--------------.
|struct creator|
'--------------'
|
V
.----------------.
(internal structure)
'----------------'
.--------------'--------------.
V V
.-------------------------. .--------------------------.
|internal HTML transformer| |external LaTeX transformer|
'-------------------------' '--------------------------'
| |
V V
.-----------. .------------.
(internal HTML) (external LaTeX)
'-----------' '------------'
|
V
.-------------------------.
|external HTML transformer|
'-------------------------'
|
V
.-----------.
(external HTML)
'-----------'
But at least PlantUML did some kind of minimal routing for you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 19:19 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <10vnab9$jqo$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #399639 |
[This is _really_ off-topic now. Follow-up: comp.text] In article <ASCII-20260602180622@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>, Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote: >cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote or quoted: >>I used, "monodraw" on the Mac. I can't do that by hand; I am >>not artistically gifted. :-) > > I have been searching for an ASCII-to-ASCII program for a long > time and never found anything impressive. I want to write > a /description/ of my diagram in ASCII and then want to get > my diagram as ASCII. Dot, ditaa, nothing worked. > > The least bad solution I found so far is called /PlantUML/. Personally, I rather like `pic` and `nroff`. Your mileage may vary, however, depending on the complexity of the diagram. - Dan C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-04 00:11 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <10vqfrh$259o$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #399639 |
On 2 Jun 2026 17:08:57 GMT, Stefan Ram wrote:
> The least bad solution I found so far is called /PlantUML/.
I, too, came across this while looking at diagram-creation tools
recently.
> "C:\example\java.exe" -jar "C:\example\plantuml.jar" -txt "example.puml"
The Debian package <https://packages.debian.org/trixie/plantuml>
provides a wrapper to make invocation more convenient:
ldo@theon:~> file $(type -p plantuml)
/usr/bin/plantuml: POSIX shell script, ASCII text executable
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 15:39 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <10vnm2m$382un$3@kst.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #399633 |
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
> In article <10vmna7$3uus8$13@dont-email.me>,
> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>On 2026-06-02 15:05, Dan Cross wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> ┌──────â”
>>> │ expr │
>>> └──────┘
>>> ╱ │ ╲
>>> ╱ │ ╲
[...]
>>
>>I suppose you have some tool to create those fancy graphics?
>>What are you using for that? - Or is that all hand-crafted?
>
> I used, "monodraw" on the Mac. I can't do that by hand; I am
> not artistically gifted. :-)
For whatever reason, I'm seeing your drawings as gibberish
in articles you post, but as nicely formatted drawings when
they're quoted in replies by others.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojibake
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 13:14 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Fancy graphics (was Re: this girl calls c ugly) |
| Message-ID | <10vp9cd$frf$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #399654 |
In article <10vnm2m$382un$3@kst.eternal-september.org>, Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: >cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes: >> In article <10vmna7$3uus8$13@dont-email.me>, >> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>On 2026-06-02 15:05, Dan Cross wrote: >>>> [...] >>>> >>>> ┌──────┠>>>> │ expr │ >>>> └──────┘ >>>> ╱ │ ╲ >>>> ╱ │ ╲ >[...] >>> >>>I suppose you have some tool to create those fancy graphics? >>>What are you using for that? - Or is that all hand-crafted? >> >> I used, "monodraw" on the Mac. I can't do that by hand; I am >> not artistically gifted. :-) > >For whatever reason, I'm seeing your drawings as gibberish >in articles you post, but as nicely formatted drawings when >they're quoted in replies by others. > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojibake Thanks. I customize things to add the appropriate headers. - Dan C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 15:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mnCTR.17470$_BG8.10863@fx24.iad> |
| In reply to | #399623 |
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes: >In article <10vh1eo$1ei50$2@dont-email.me>, Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > >Both expressions above correspond to an AST like: > > ┌───────┐ > │BinOp +│ > └───────┘ > ╱ ╲ > ╱ ╲ > ┌───────┐ ┌───────┐ > │BinOp *│ │Sym `c`│ > └───────┘ └───────┘ > ╱ ╲ > ╱ ╲ > ┌───────┐ ┌───────┐ > │Sym `a`│ │Sym `b`│ > └───────┘ └───────┘ Ah, the dangers of assuming everyone uses UTF-8.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-02 15:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10vmt11$cev$4@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #399631 |
In article <mnCTR.17470$_BG8.10863@fx24.iad>,
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
>cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
>>In article <10vh1eo$1ei50$2@dont-email.me>, Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Both expressions above correspond to an AST like:
>>
>> ┌───────┐
>> │BinOp +│
>> └───────┘
>> ╱ ╲
>> ╱ ╲
>> ┌───────┐ ┌───────┐
>> │BinOp *│ │Sym `c`│
>> └───────┘ └───────┘
>> ╱ ╲
>> ╱ ╲
>> ┌───────┐ ┌───────┐
>> │Sym `a`│ │Sym `b`│
>> └───────┘ └───────┘
>
>Ah, the dangers of assuming everyone uses UTF-8.
Yeah, my bad. Here:
+-------+
|BinOp +|
+-------+
/ \
/ \
+-------+ +-------+
|BinOp *| |Sym `c`|
+-------+ +-------+
/ \
/ \
+-------+ +-------+
|Sym `a`| |Sym `b`|
+-------+ +-------+
(The original looks bad in my newsreader, too.)
- Dan C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-31 10:15 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <10vhfp5$1iv7k$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #399548 |
On 2026-05-31 05:49, David Brown wrote: ... > Of course. Parentheses do not affect the generated code unless they > affect the semantics of the expression. (Some people think parentheses > affect the order of evaluation, but that is not the case for most > compilers.) I assume that last sentence is meant to apply only to parentheses which don't change the semantics? Otherwise it seems manifestly false.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-31 16:29 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <10vhgki$1j9hm$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #399555 |
On 31/05/2026 16:15, James Kuyper wrote: > On 2026-05-31 05:49, David Brown wrote: > ... >> Of course. Parentheses do not affect the generated code unless they >> affect the semantics of the expression. (Some people think parentheses >> affect the order of evaluation, but that is not the case for most >> compilers.) > > I assume that last sentence is meant to apply only to parentheses which > don't change the semantics? Otherwise it seems manifestly false. Yes. I thought I was quite clear in this, given that I wrote almost exactly that in the previous sentence (which you also quoted above).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-31 03:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <10vh3gu$1fhs1$1@kst.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #399545 |
Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> writes:
> On 31/05/2026 00:43, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> C's operator precedence rules are complicated and arguably flawed.
>> They could have been defined differently. A simpler set of rules,
>> with fewer levels,*might* have been better. I don't have any
>> concrete suggestions -- nor do I have any strong preferences.
>> I accept C's rules as they are. I would accept them if they had
>> been defined differently.
>
> Can't the compiler easily remove any parens that aren't necessary?
> So - just write complex expressions in a way that a human can most
> easily understand, it makes your intention clear and probable doesn't
> increase the size of the executable.
Compilers generally remove *all* parens, necessary or not.
The output of a compiler is assembly or machine code. You almost
certainly can't tell from the generated code whether the input was,
for example, `a * b + c`, `(a * b) + c`, or `(((a) * (b)) + (c))`.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-31 04:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <10vh4g1$1fhs1$2@kst.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #399551 |
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
> Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> writes:
>> On 31/05/2026 00:43, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> C's operator precedence rules are complicated and arguably flawed.
>>> They could have been defined differently. A simpler set of rules,
>>> with fewer levels,*might* have been better. I don't have any
>>> concrete suggestions -- nor do I have any strong preferences.
>>> I accept C's rules as they are. I would accept them if they had
>>> been defined differently.
>>
>> Can't the compiler easily remove any parens that aren't necessary?
>> So - just write complex expressions in a way that a human can most
>> easily understand, it makes your intention clear and probable doesn't
>> increase the size of the executable.
>
> Compilers generally remove *all* parens, necessary or not.
> The output of a compiler is assembly or machine code. You almost
> certainly can't tell from the generated code whether the input was,
> for example, `a * b + c`, `(a * b) + c`, or `(((a) * (b)) + (c))`.
I realize I missed part of the point of your question.
Adding parentheses to an expression in a way that yields
an equivalent expression almost certainly will not affect the
generated code. Any parentheses that "restate" the precedence
rules are only for the convenience of human readers.
Ideally, you should always use exactly the right number of
parentheses to optimize readability. But since humans are not
compilers, there is no one way to do that. I would probably
add parentheses to `x == y & z`, assuming I really wanted the
semantics of `(x == y) & z` for some reason, but I would find the
superfluous parentheses in `x + (y * z)` or `x = (y + z)` annoying.
(Almost as annoying as the poor choice of variable names.)
It's possible to have too few parentheses or too many.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-31 09:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <86tsrnefac.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #399545 |
Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> writes: > just write complex expressions in a way that a human can most > easily understand, Unfortunately, (1) different people have different ideas of what writing is most easily understood, and (2) different readers have different notions of which writings are easily understood, and which writings are not so easily understood. To make things worse "easily understood" is not a boolean condition, nor is it necessarily well-ordered -- "most easily understood" isn't always a well-defined quality, even for a given audience. Sadly the idea of writing in a way that is "most easily understood" has resulted in a race to the bottom, where writers are more and more encouraged to take the view that (some) readers are pretty much arbitrarily stupid, with the result that expressions become littered with scads of unnecessary parentheses that actually detract from ease of reading. Good writing is always a balance between too much and too little.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web