Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #391319 > unrolled thread
| Started by | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-03-18 21:38 -0400 |
| Last post | 2025-03-23 12:29 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 422 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-18 21:38 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-18 19:05 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-18 19:22 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-18 22:43 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-18 20:11 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-18 20:07 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-18 23:34 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-19 04:01 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 00:38 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-18 22:27 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 13:23 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-19 13:40 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-19 11:56 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 15:06 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-19 12:52 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-19 11:55 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 13:23 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-19 17:38 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-19 20:19 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-19 19:03 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-20 05:09 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-20 12:23 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-20 13:36 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-20 14:00 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-20 14:32 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-20 15:11 +0000
Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-24 16:37 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-24 16:14 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-24 17:20 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-24 21:56 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-25 08:45 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-25 09:08 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-25 19:55 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 09:18 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-25 08:39 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-25 03:51 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-25 13:11 +0200
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-25 05:02 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-25 16:33 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-25 20:04 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 09:23 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 13:31 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 09:34 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 02:59 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 12:33 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 15:59 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 17:37 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 12:38 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 22:53 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 15:15 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-27 10:11 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-29 18:25 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-29 18:20 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-30 01:39 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-03-31 17:15 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-31 19:48 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-31 21:14 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-31 14:56 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-26 14:07 -0400
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-26 17:58 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-26 14:20 -0400
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 12:42 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-26 17:36 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-27 13:48 -0400
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-27 18:31 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-29 10:14 -0400
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-29 16:39 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-29 21:02 -0400
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-27 12:31 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-27 20:06 +0000
Newsgroup etiquette Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-28 11:03 -0700
Re: Newsgroup etiquette Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-28 18:39 +0000
Re: Newsgroup etiquette Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-28 18:45 +0000
Re: Newsgroup etiquette Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-04-27 12:28 -0700
Re: Newsgroup etiquette Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-04-27 14:40 -0700
Re: Newsgroup etiquette Ethan Carter <ec1828@somewhere.edu> - 2025-04-28 00:59 -0300
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 15:58 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-25 19:09 +0200
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-25 17:34 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-25 19:49 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-25 12:53 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 13:39 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-02-07 00:04 -0800
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-25 13:23 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 09:50 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-25 16:22 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2025-03-25 18:18 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-25 19:55 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 13:41 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-25 23:35 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 16:38 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-25 19:55 -0400
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 10:00 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-26 16:01 +0200
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-26 14:45 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-26 17:16 +0200
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-26 08:55 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 17:45 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-26 17:22 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-26 17:19 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 17:40 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-26 17:25 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 21:27 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-26 20:34 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 13:50 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-26 21:04 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 14:12 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-26 21:18 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-26 23:22 +0200
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-26 14:38 -0400
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-26 18:52 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 17:32 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-26 22:29 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-26 14:31 -0400
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 21:33 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-28 15:42 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-25 19:52 -0400
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 17:16 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-25 04:55 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 13:48 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-25 21:52 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-25 22:36 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-25 23:14 +0000
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 10:09 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-03 20:03 -0700
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-04 14:04 +0200
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-05-04 15:43 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-04 18:39 +0200
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-05-04 19:02 +0100
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-05 11:29 +0200
Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-15 23:02 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-20 14:50 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-20 16:59 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-20 15:16 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-20 17:29 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-20 15:55 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-23 11:01 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-23 12:56 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-20 11:47 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-20 12:28 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-20 15:40 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-20 15:57 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-20 20:46 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-20 19:15 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-20 19:58 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-20 22:57 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-20 21:10 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-20 16:10 -0700
The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-24 16:59 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-24 15:57 -0700
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-25 10:38 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-25 16:31 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-25 19:23 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 13:14 -0700
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 23:50 -0700
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 10:33 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-25 19:18 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 18:50 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-25 20:45 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 23:30 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 14:59 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 11:29 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 15:08 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 17:50 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 19:09 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 21:39 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-26 23:21 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-26 23:51 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-27 00:32 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-27 13:51 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-27 01:10 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-27 01:33 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-27 10:54 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-27 14:09 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-28 17:49 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-27 14:07 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-27 03:24 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-27 11:14 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-27 14:14 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 02:05 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-28 10:13 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 11:22 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-28 14:32 +0300
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 13:42 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-28 11:37 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 13:53 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-28 13:00 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 14:06 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-03-28 10:05 -0700
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-28 12:19 +0000
[OT] PC hardware prices [correction] (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-31 21:35 +0200
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-27 15:04 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 02:59 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-03-27 19:03 -0700
[OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 03:26 +0100
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-27 23:14 -0700
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-28 13:26 +0300
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-28 13:08 +0100
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-28 15:20 +0300
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-28 15:33 +0100
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-03-28 10:26 -0700
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-03-28 10:27 -0700
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-28 18:44 +0000
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-28 17:46 +0000
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-28 17:45 +0000
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 13:20 +0100
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-28 15:56 +0300
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 14:20 +0100
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-28 15:43 +0100
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-28 17:54 +0000
Re: [OT] SPARC (was Re: The integral type 'byte') "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-03-28 10:16 -0700
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-28 11:03 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-28 14:01 +0300
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-28 11:29 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 12:46 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-28 12:30 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 11:10 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2025-03-26 11:02 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 12:47 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-26 13:12 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 14:48 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 15:40 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-26 18:29 +0000
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 15:22 +0100
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 13:09 -0700
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 13:16 -0700
Re: The integral type 'byte' (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 11:33 +0100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-20 12:22 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-20 12:10 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-20 20:59 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-20 16:18 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-20 23:55 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-21 00:46 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-21 01:23 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-20 18:47 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-21 11:53 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-21 12:04 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-22 00:23 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-21 20:50 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-22 13:06 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 14:51 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 14:52 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-23 01:34 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-23 10:50 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-23 11:25 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-23 14:12 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-24 12:51 +0100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-24 14:07 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-24 15:32 +0100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-24 15:00 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-24 17:22 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-24 16:12 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-24 16:02 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-24 16:17 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-24 16:49 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-24 16:56 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-24 18:20 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-25 08:40 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 11:09 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-25 14:46 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 15:04 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-25 15:09 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 16:40 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-26 09:20 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-26 10:07 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-26 18:06 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-27 00:22 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-27 14:22 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-27 10:54 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-28 16:13 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-28 16:40 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-28 20:41 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-28 22:18 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-28 15:33 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-28 22:48 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-28 16:53 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-29 00:32 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-28 18:50 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-29 16:24 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-29 13:37 +0100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-29 16:33 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-29 17:23 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-29 18:11 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-28 10:57 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-25 16:16 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-25 13:29 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 14:58 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-25 17:14 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 16:37 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-25 19:00 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-24 17:15 +0000
Code-change-to-run times (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-24 18:44 +0100
Re: Code-change-to-run times (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-24 23:06 +0200
Re: Code-change-to-run times (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-24 23:44 +0100
Re: Code-change-to-run times (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-25 13:00 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-24 21:16 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-25 08:41 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 11:04 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-25 14:43 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-25 13:51 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 14:22 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-24 17:10 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-24 19:07 +0100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-24 15:44 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-03-24 11:27 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-24 20:13 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-24 23:01 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 11:17 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-24 15:42 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-03-24 11:27 -0700
Compiler speed (ad nauseam) (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-24 18:01 +0100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-24 19:25 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-25 00:53 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-03-24 19:00 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-24 21:50 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-25 08:19 +0100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-22 14:41 +0100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-23 11:41 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-23 14:13 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-23 23:19 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-22 07:05 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-22 02:37 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-22 12:20 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-22 13:50 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-22 15:47 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-22 17:00 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 15:31 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-21 17:51 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-21 18:51 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-22 02:16 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-22 04:15 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-21 21:24 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-22 14:07 +0000
Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 02:04 +0100
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-03-25 22:35 -0400
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 12:40 +0100
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 14:47 +0100
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-26 17:55 +0100
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-26 19:36 +0200
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-26 13:44 +0000
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 16:19 +0100
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-26 02:37 +0000
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-03-26 14:42 +0100
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2025-03-26 19:01 +0100
Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-26 18:49 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-22 00:01 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-22 01:41 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-22 14:22 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-22 14:32 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-22 16:25 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-20 16:35 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-20 14:42 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-20 16:20 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-20 11:33 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-20 12:07 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-19 12:59 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-19 22:12 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-20 05:19 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-18 20:26 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 00:42 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-19 04:51 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 01:02 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-19 05:23 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-20 06:06 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-20 13:27 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-20 16:50 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-20 11:24 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-20 18:53 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-20 16:56 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-22 16:46 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-23 08:25 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-23 12:06 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-23 10:15 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-23 12:35 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-24 13:09 +0100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Peter 'Shaggy' Haywood <phaywood@alphalink.com.au> - 2025-03-22 19:07 +1100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-22 13:25 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-22 19:12 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-22 19:17 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-22 17:22 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-22 10:29 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Peter 'Shaggy' Haywood <phaywood@alphalink.com.au> - 2025-03-25 21:41 +1100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-22 14:30 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-22 11:31 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-22 19:19 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 14:54 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Ike Naar <ike@sdf.org> - 2025-03-19 07:16 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-19 01:53 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 16:45 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-19 21:21 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-19 21:35 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-19 14:56 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 22:34 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-19 19:46 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 11:25 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-03-19 10:15 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-19 12:40 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-03-19 17:42 +0100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 09:03 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-19 14:40 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-19 17:39 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-19 15:42 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Alexis <flexibeast@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 15:05 +1100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-22 10:19 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Alexis <flexibeast@gmail.com> - 2025-03-23 11:05 +1100
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-03-23 16:22 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-19 13:13 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-20 09:50 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-20 04:59 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-20 16:14 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-20 16:29 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-20 16:49 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-03-21 09:09 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-21 17:12 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-19 12:36 +0200
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-19 09:13 -0400
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-20 05:15 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-20 12:14 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-21 00:05 -0700
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-03-21 07:48 +0000
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 13:32 -0500
Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2025-03-23 12:29 -0400
Page 18 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 16 17 [18] 19 20 … 22 Next page →
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-26 16:19 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) |
| Message-ID | <vs15tq$21fdg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391671 |
On 26.03.2025 14:44, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
>> On 3/25/25 21:04, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>>> On 22.03.2025 15:07, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Actually, to do fast division of N-bit number by fixed N-bit number
>>>> one need 2N-bit multiplication.
>>>
>>> I just stumbled across your post and above sentence. Do you mean *one*
>>> multiplication of 2N bit numbers?
>> I think he meant "one needs 2N-bit multiplication". "one" is a pronoun
>> in this context, not a number.
>
> Yes, of course "one" in my text above is a pronoun. I do not know
> how Janis guessed one multiplication, but it is correct guess.
The "one" was clear ("one need", "you need", "we need", etc.).
What was unclear was whether there's indeed only one multiplication
necessary. The "2N-bit multiplication" would also have been clear
from its writing; meaning "[one] multiplication of 2N bit entities".
But I couldn't imagine that a _general_ [non-const] division a/b
could be done with only one multiplication. That's were I speculated
whether you may have meant, say, "two N-bit multiplications" or some
such. - That's why I was asking for confirmation. - Later I saw that
you meant just a special case division a/c (with a _constant_ c),
which of course can be pre-computed.
Janis
> [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-26 02:37 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) |
| Message-ID | <vrvp94$3q1ah$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #391648 |
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 22.03.2025 15:07, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>>
>> Actually, to do fast division of N-bit number by fixed N-bit number
>> one need 2N-bit multiplication.
>
> I just stumbled across your post and above sentence. Do you mean *one*
> multiplication of 2N bit numbers? - Could you please explain that (by
> an example, or could you provide a reference)?
One multiplications with 2N bit result + few other operations
like shifts and additions. Consider for example:
unsigned int
divv(unsigned int a) {
return a/1234567;
}
My gcc-12 at -O generates the following assembly code:
divv:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
movl %edi, %eax
movl $3000869427, %edx
imulq %rdx, %rax
shrq $32, %rax
subl %eax, %edi
shrl %edi
addl %edi, %eax
shrl $20, %eax
ret
So 1 multiplication, 3 shifts, subtraction and addtion. When
more bits of multiplication are available one can use smaller
number of extra operations. For example, when I change
function above so that argument is 16-bit and divisor is
12345, the code is:
divv:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
movzwl %di, %eax
imull $43489, %eax, %eax
shrl $29, %eax
ret
So just 1 multiplication and 1 shift.
The idea beside this is quite simple: instead of division we
multiply by reciprocal. Reciprocal is represented in fixed
point aritihemtic (so normally there is at least one shift to get
binary point in right place). Since divisor is fixed reciprocal can
be precomputed. This works best when there is enough accuracy,
otherwise one needs to add extra steps. Working out how
many bits of accuracy are needed is a bit tricky, in particular
by adding extra operations one can lower needed accuracy.
> (The reason for my question is that for integer divisions of length N
> an old DSP I used required besides shifts effectively N subtractions
> to create the result and modulus; it didn't use any multiplications.)
Method above is good when you have fast and wide multiplier (compared
to your numbers). Also there is cost of precomputation,
to gain divisor must be fixed or at least change slowly.
If you have varying divisor then one can use Newton method
(IIUC this is what modern CPU-s use). Shifts and subtractions
are good when you do not have fast multiplier.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-26 14:42 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) |
| Message-ID | <vs108m$1scgt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391650 |
On 26.03.2025 03:37, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 22.03.2025 15:07, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually, to do fast division of N-bit number by fixed N-bit number
>>> one need 2N-bit multiplication.
>>
>> I just stumbled across your post and above sentence. Do you mean *one*
>> multiplication of 2N bit numbers? - Could you please explain that (by
>> an example, or could you provide a reference)?
>
> One multiplications with 2N bit result + few other operations
> like shifts and additions. Consider for example:
>
> unsigned int
> divv(unsigned int a) {
> return a/1234567;
> }
Ah, I suppose you meant that (in case of constant divisors) the
compiler would just _pre-compute_ the reciprocal value (and can
then just multiply, of course). - Is that understanding correct?
Given that I don't know the semantics of the assembler below I'm
just speculating, but - given you used a constant "1234567" - it
seems the compiler used a different value ("3000869427") for the
multiplication, the reciprocal - right?
>
> My gcc-12 at -O generates the following assembly code:
>
> divv:
> .LFB0:
> .cfi_startproc
> movl %edi, %eax
> movl $3000869427, %edx
> imulq %rdx, %rax
> shrq $32, %rax
> subl %eax, %edi
> shrl %edi
> addl %edi, %eax
> shrl $20, %eax
> ret
>
> So 1 multiplication, 3 shifts, subtraction and addtion. When
> more bits of multiplication are available one can use smaller
> number of extra operations. For example, when I change
> function above so that argument is 16-bit and divisor is
> 12345, the code is:
>
> divv:
> .LFB0:
> .cfi_startproc
> movzwl %di, %eax
> imull $43489, %eax, %eax
> shrl $29, %eax
> ret
>
> So just 1 multiplication and 1 shift.
>
> The idea beside this is quite simple: instead of division we
> multiply by reciprocal.
First I thought that your formulation implies that there's a trick
where _any_ division a/b could be expressed by a multiplication
(and some primitive binary operations). - Which would have been cool.
> Reciprocal is represented in fixed
> point aritihemtic (so normally there is at least one shift to get
> binary point in right place). Since divisor is fixed reciprocal can
> be precomputed. This works best when there is enough accuracy,
> otherwise one needs to add extra steps. Working out how
> many bits of accuracy are needed is a bit tricky, in particular
> by adding extra operations one can lower needed accuracy.
>
>> (The reason for my question is that for integer divisions of length N
>> an old DSP I used required besides shifts effectively N subtractions
>> to create the result and modulus; it didn't use any multiplications.)
>
> Method above is good when you have fast and wide multiplier (compared
> to your numbers). Also there is cost of precomputation,
> to gain divisor must be fixed or at least change slowly.
> If you have varying divisor then one can use Newton method
> (IIUC this is what modern CPU-s use). Shifts and subtractions
> are good when you do not have fast multiplier.
Actually the (meanwhile very old) DSP I used (in the mid 1980's) had
a fast multiplier; + and - were done in one cycle, * (asymptotically)
also one cycle. The interesting part was that the [general] non-const
division was "constructed" (as opposed to pre-existing as an opcode).
All operations (roughly) required just one cycle but the division; it
was constructed by a 'repeat' opcode for the next opcode. So if you
had written something like LACC addr1 ; RPTK 16 ; SUBC addr2 that
would have divided the data *addr1 / *addr2 (informally written)
providing both results, the division and the modulus.
Out of interest I've implemented the logic in "C" to demonstrate it
(the variable names reflect the DSP terminology and the sizes of the
data words (16) and accumulator (32), only the '<< 15' is originally
part of the 'subc' opcode/"C" function (but shifts did not cost any
extra cycles, they've been done in passing, sort of):
void subc (int32_t * acc, int32_t * dma)
{
int32_t acc_out;
if ((acc_out = *acc - *dma) >= 0)
*acc = acc_out << 1 | 1;
else
*acc <<= 1;
}
...
int16_t z = 47;
int16_t n = 6;
// calculate "z div n" and "z mod n"
int32_t acc = z;
int32_t dma = n << 15;
for (int i=1; i<=16; i++)
subc (&acc, &dma);
printf ("%d div %d = %d\n", z, n, acc&0xffff);
printf ("%d mod %d = %d\n", z, n, acc>>16);
I considered that DSP feature quite interesting. That was from a time
where the usual processors required something like 4 cycles for + and
-, around 16 cycles for *, and 80 cycles for the division. (Numbers
are just faint memories from an 68k CPU, so correct me if I'm wrong.)
Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-26 19:01 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) |
| Message-ID | <c3g8ujtv9lqqlf5d3go718ao0sh6d8ujfq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #391648 |
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 02:04:40 +0100, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >On 22.03.2025 15:07, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >> >> Actually, to do fast division of N-bit number by fixed N-bit number >> one need 2N-bit multiplication. pheraps that means a/b where a is in a big set, is more heavy to calculate that a* 1/b where a is in a big set of numbers >I just stumbled across your post and above sentence. Do you mean *one* >multiplication of 2N bit numbers? - Could you please explain that (by >an example, or could you provide a reference)? > >(The reason for my question is that for integer divisions of length N >an old DSP I used required besides shifts effectively N subtractions >to create the result and modulus; it didn't use any multiplications.) > >Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-26 18:49 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Fast division (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) |
| Message-ID | <20250326113353.769@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #391648 |
On 2025-03-26, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 22.03.2025 15:07, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>>
>> Actually, to do fast division of N-bit number by fixed N-bit number
>> one need 2N-bit multiplication.
>
> I just stumbled across your post and above sentence. Do you mean *one*
> multiplication of 2N bit numbers? - Could you please explain that (by
> an example, or could you provide a reference)?
When an integer divisor is a constant expression like 17,
we can calculate the division x/17 using multiplication itself.
It's easier to ask AI than to work this out from scratch.
The AI I choose for this task is GCC:
Given the prompt:
unsigned div17(unsigned x)
{
return x/17;
}
The GCC language model version 14 generates this Motorola 68K assembly:
div17:
move.l 4(%sp),%d0
mulu.l #4042322161,%d1:%d0
move.l %d1,%d0
lsr.l #4,%d0
rts
The argument value is on the stack at 4(%sp), and gets loaded into
d0. This undergoes a 64 bit multiplication into the pair of registers
d1:d0.
This is then effectively shifted right by 36 bits to truncate it
to integer. This is because the result is a rational integer
represented in fixed point, where the low 36 bits are fractional.
What is the magic constant 4042322161? It's this, rounded off:
1> (/ (expt 2 36) 17)
4042322160.94118
Basically 1/17 scaled by 2^36. Why 36 is that the result fits into 32 bits; we
don't need to represent the initial zeros past the binary point.
So if we multiply by this representation of 1/17 and then remove
the scale, we get a result divided by 17.
Obviously, this is not practical for a non-constant divisor, because
it takes more calculation to obtain the multiplication coefficient
than to just use the division instruction.
P.S. I used unsigned because the int version resulted in more
complicated code, with details that distract from the basic idea.
--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-22 00:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vrkulk$2k04q$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391477 |
On 21/03/2025 17:51, Waldek Hebisch wrote: > bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> As defined by Unix/Linux, long is not portable between different >> Unix/Linux OSes if they run on a different architecture. > > It portably between 32 and 64 bit machines gives word-sized > integer type. Which was not its intention. (Probably intptr_t or ssize_t is better for that purpose, and will be portable between Windows and Linux.) >> As defined by Microsoft, long is portable between Windows OSes even on >> different architectures. > > It gives 'long' different meaning than it had previously. I explained the differences without necessarily saying one is better than the other. Sometimes one is more more useful, sometimes the other. > And to > that matters rather useless meaning, as already 'int' gives 32 > bit integers on bigger machines. Well, 'long' is also useless on 32-bit Linux machines as it is the same size as 'int'. Why didn't it also increase when 'int' migrated from i16 to i32? One 'con' for Linux' approach is when someone assumes 'long' is i32; when they run code on 64 bits, it will either be wasteful, or it could go badly wrong. While those running on Linux64 and expect 'long' to be double the width of 'int', may also experience failures on Linux32. On Windows, you just learn to avoid 'long' completely. After all you don't need 5 basic types for four integer sizes! > >> 'long long' is defined as a 64-bit >>> type in both Windows and Linux. >>> >>> Using the defined width types is far better (e.g. uint64_t); >>> even if the standard allows the type to not exist on a particular >>> implementation. No useful implementation would fail to define >>> uint64_t in these modern times. >> > <snip> >> The problem with 'long' manifests itself there too, since on Linux, >> 'int64_t' appears to be commonly defined on top of 'long' for 32-bit >> systems, and 'long long' for 64-bit ones. > > You mixed up this: 'int64_t' is defined as 'long long' for 32-bit > systems and as 'long' for 64-bit ones. Sorry, yes. But it shows how confusing it all is: LL/ll is used for 64 bits on 32-bit systems L/l is used for 32 bits on 64-bit systems! (I'm so glad I switched to all-64-bits in my own stuff, early last decade. However lots of software has taken a long time to catch up. I acquired an RPi 4 board 5 years ago with a view to doing 64-bit ARM development, but most OSes were still 32 bits, and 64-bit ones immature. (You need a 64-bit OS to easily develop and run 64-bit programs.) Even now, 32-bit OSes are supplied by default. I finally got a solid 64-bit OS for it last week. I just wondered what the point is of having 64-bit hardware if people just run 32-bit stuff on it.) > Doing it as you wrote > would give you variable length type. Of course, if you need > word-sized integer in Windows you may define it as 'long' for 32-bit > Windows and as 'long long' for 64-bit ones. > (I'll tell you a secret: my C compiler automatically reads a special header that includes these definitions: typedef signed char i8; typedef short i16; typedef int i32; typedef long long int i64; typedef unsigned char u8; typedef unsigned char byte; typedef unsigned short u16; typedef unsigned int u32; typedef unsigned long long int u64; typedef float r32; typedef double r64; It makes the writing of hundreds of small test programs so much easier. I wonder how many do the same, although they'd have to use a discrete header.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-22 01:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vrl4g4$2lf61$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #391484 |
bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
> On 21/03/2025 17:51, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>
>>> As defined by Unix/Linux, long is not portable between different
>>> Unix/Linux OSes if they run on a different architecture.
>>
>> It portably between 32 and 64 bit machines gives word-sized
>> integer type.
>
> Which was not its intention.
This was intention when 64-bit machines appeared.
> (Probably intptr_t or ssize_t is better for
> that purpose, and will be portable between Windows and Linux.)
Those did not exist in 1991 and would be needed only for small
machines. Except for Microsoft which decided to push its own,
different way.
>>> As defined by Microsoft, long is portable between Windows OSes even on
>>> different architectures.
>>
>> It gives 'long' different meaning than it had previously.
>
>
> I explained the differences without necessarily saying one is better
> than the other. Sometimes one is more more useful, sometimes the other.
AFAICS your main trouble with 'long' is inconsistency. And the
inconsistency is due to Microsoft, as previously 'long' had
consitent definition on resonable machines: integer with max of
32 bits and word size, which simplified to word size on
"bigger" machines.
>> And to
>> that matters rather useless meaning, as already 'int' gives 32
>> bit integers on bigger machines.
>
> Well, 'long' is also useless on 32-bit Linux machines as it is the same
> size as 'int'.
Not always. Motorola 68000 used 16-bit int. That was because
original 68000 had 16-bit bus which made 16-bit integers faster.
> One 'con' for Linux' approach is when someone assumes 'long' is i32;
> when they run code on 64 bits, it will either be wasteful, or it could
> go badly wrong.
One 'con' of any assumption is that somebody can make a different
assumption.
> (I'm so glad I switched to all-64-bits in my own stuff, early last decade.
>
> However lots of software has taken a long time to catch up. I acquired
> an RPi 4 board 5 years ago with a view to doing 64-bit ARM development,
> but most OSes were still 32 bits, and 64-bit ones immature. (You need a
> 64-bit OS to easily develop and run 64-bit programs.)
I am not sure what was available for RPi 4. But in 2019 I got 64-bit
chinese ARM board and it was well supported by 64-bit Linux (armbian).
Apparently Raspberry Pi foundation wanted to have the same OS on all
their boards (not only newest ones) so they delivered 32-bit OS for
some time after 64-bit board appeared. IIUC normal Linux distributions
rather quickly got 64-bit ARM versions.
> Even now, 32-bit OSes are supplied by default. I finally got a solid
> 64-bit OS for it last week. I just wondered what the point is of having
> 64-bit hardware if people just run 32-bit stuff on it.)
See above.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-22 14:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2JzDP.1208306$_N6e.1205396@fx17.iad> |
| In reply to | #391486 |
antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) writes: >bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> On 21/03/2025 17:51, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> (Probably intptr_t or ssize_t is better for >> that purpose, and will be portable between Windows and Linux.) > >Those did not exist in 1991 and would be needed only for small >machines. Except for Microsoft which decided to push its own, >different way. ssize_t existed in before 1990 (in SVR4). intptr_t came later. $ grep ssize_t common/head/* common/head/aio.h: ssize_t aio__return; /* operation result value */ common/head/unistd.h:extern ssize_t read(int, void *, size_t); common/head/unistd.h:extern ssize_t write(int, const void *, size_t); >> One 'con' for Linux' approach is when someone assumes 'long' is i32; >> when they run code on 64 bits, it will either be wasteful, or it could >> go badly wrong. > >One 'con' of any assumption is that somebody can make a different >assumption. Programmers shouldn't be making 'assumptions' in the first place. The architectural ABI describes fully the capabilities of the native types. If the programmer isn't aware of that, they shouldn't be programming.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-22 14:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vrmhl1$3ipe$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391505 |
On 22/03/2025 14:22, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Programmers shouldn't be making 'assumptions' in the first place. > > The architectural ABI describes fully the capabilities of the > native types. If the programmer isn't aware of that, they > shouldn't be programming. Did programmer just assume that all programmers are told on which platforms their code will be run? Not all C programmers are so pampered. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-22 16:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vrmo9s$933o$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391505 |
On 22/03/2025 14:22, Scott Lurndal wrote: > antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) writes: >> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >>> On 21/03/2025 17:51, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > >>> (Probably intptr_t or ssize_t is better for >>> that purpose, and will be portable between Windows and Linux.) >> >> Those did not exist in 1991 and would be needed only for small >> machines. Except for Microsoft which decided to push its own, >> different way. > > ssize_t existed in before 1990 (in SVR4). intptr_t came later. > > $ grep ssize_t common/head/* > common/head/aio.h: ssize_t aio__return; /* operation result value */ > common/head/unistd.h:extern ssize_t read(int, void *, size_t); > common/head/unistd.h:extern ssize_t write(int, const void *, size_t); > > >>> One 'con' for Linux' approach is when someone assumes 'long' is i32; >>> when they run code on 64 bits, it will either be wasteful, or it could >>> go badly wrong. >> >> One 'con' of any assumption is that somebody can make a different >> assumption. > > Programmers shouldn't be making 'assumptions' in the first place. > > The architectural ABI describes fully the capabilities of the > native types. If the programmer isn't aware of that, they > shouldn't be programming. > This is 'making assumptions' when the code is subsequently run on a different platform. And those assumptions made by a million programmers in myriad codebases are behind decisions on whether to increase 'int' and/or 'long' when implementing the language on a new architecture with wider types.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-20 16:35 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20250320163537.000018f1@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #391400 |
On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 13:36:43 GMT scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote: > bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > >On 20/03/2025 12:09, Tim Rentsch wrote: > >> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: > > > >>> I suspected that, but was not sure, so suggested to DFS a type > >>> that I am sure about. > >> > >> The width of char and [un]signed char must be at least 8 bits. > >> The width of [un]signed short must be at least 16 bits. > >> The width of [un]signed int must be at least 16 bits. > >> The width of [un]signed long must be at least 32 bits. > >> The width of [un]signed long long must be at least 64 bits. > >> > >> That should be easy enough to remember now. > > > >That table suggests that any program mixing 'short' and 'int' is > >suspect. If 'int' doesn't need to store values beyond 16 bits, then > >why not use 'short'? > > > >'long' is another troublesome one. If the need is for 32-bit values, > >then it's surprisingly rare in source code. > > Long is useless, because Microsoft made the mistake of defining > 'long' as 32-bits on 64-bit architectures, while unix and linux > define it as 64-bits. > > So long can't be used in programs intended to be portable to > other operating systems. 'long long' is defined as a 64-bit > type in both Windows and Linux. > > Using the defined width types is far better (e.g. uint64_t); > even if the standard allows the type to not exist on a particular > implementation. No useful implementation would fail to define > uint64_t in these modern times. > Unfortunately, gcc people made a mess out of it as well, defining (on 64-bit Linux platforms) int64_t/uint64_t as aliases to respective 'long' types instead of aliasing them to 'long long', to be the same on all platforms that matter. I'd guess they were afraid of being accused of being sensible.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-20 14:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vrh9fu$3eg1e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391400 |
On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 13:36:43 GMT scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wibbled: >bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >>On 20/03/2025 12:09, Tim Rentsch wrote: >>> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: >> >>>> I suspected that, but was not sure, so suggested to DFS a type that I am >>>> sure about. >>> >>> The width of char and [un]signed char must be at least 8 bits. >>> The width of [un]signed short must be at least 16 bits. >>> The width of [un]signed int must be at least 16 bits. >>> The width of [un]signed long must be at least 32 bits. >>> The width of [un]signed long long must be at least 64 bits. >>> >>> That should be easy enough to remember now. >> >>That table suggests that any program mixing 'short' and 'int' is >>suspect. If 'int' doesn't need to store values beyond 16 bits, then why >>not use 'short'? >> >>'long' is another troublesome one. If the need is for 32-bit values, >>then it's surprisingly rare in source code. > >Long is useless, because Microsoft made the mistake of defining >'long' as 32-bits on 64-bit architectures, while unix and linux Probably for backwards compatibility with 32 bit code that did bit twiddling with longs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-20 16:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20250320091624.937@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #391400 |
On 2025-03-20, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: > Long is useless, because Microsoft made the mistake of defining > 'long' as 32-bits on 64-bit architectures, while unix and linux > define it as 64-bits. long was once useful for avoiding the predicament int is as few as 16 bits wide on some systems. This is an almost entirely obsolete concern. In code that assumes int >= 32 bits, but is otherwise intended to be portable, long serves no purpose. In comp.lang.c, we use long for anything that needs to go beyond 32767, but not beyond 2147483647. :) -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-20 11:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <865xk3o8l6.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #391397 |
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > On 20/03/2025 12:09, Tim Rentsch wrote: > >> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: >> >>> I suspected that, but was not sure, so suggested to DFS a type that I am >>> sure about. >> >> The width of char and [un]signed char must be at least 8 bits. >> The width of [un]signed short must be at least 16 bits. >> The width of [un]signed int must be at least 16 bits. >> The width of [un]signed long must be at least 32 bits. >> The width of [un]signed long long must be at least 64 bits. >> >> That should be easy enough to remember now. > > That table suggests that any program mixing 'short' and 'int' is > suspect. To me it does not. The table lists minimum values for all implementations, and not the most common values for typical implementations. > If 'int' doesn't need to store values beyond 16 bits, then > why not use 'short'? I expect any developer who has spent even a fairly short time learning C and writing C code knows the answer to this question, and does not need to consult the table shown above to make an appropriate choice between 'int' and 'short' in each of the circumstances where the question may occur.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-20 12:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <878qozttb8.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #391397 |
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 20/03/2025 12:09, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>>> I suspected that, but was not sure, so suggested to DFS a type that I am
>>> sure about.
>> The width of char and [un]signed char must be at least 8 bits.
>> The width of [un]signed short must be at least 16 bits.
>> The width of [un]signed int must be at least 16 bits.
>> The width of [un]signed long must be at least 32 bits.
>> The width of [un]signed long long must be at least 64 bits.
>> That should be easy enough to remember now.
>
> That table suggests that any program mixing 'short' and 'int' is
> suspect. If 'int' doesn't need to store values beyond 16 bits, then
> why not use 'short'?
POSIX requires int to be at least 32 bits wide. I believe Win32
requires int to be exactly 32 bits wide. If you're writing code that
already depends on either POSIX or Win32, it's reasonable to rely on
that assumption.
[...]
> My suggestion for writing code that is not going to run on 16-bit or
> lesser (or unusual) hardware is to assume:
>
> char 8 bits
> short 16 bits
> int 32 bits
> long long 64 bits
>
> and to forget 'long'.
Are those widths supposed to be exact? You can assume those types are
*at least* that wide (if you're already relying on POSIX or Win32), but
I wouldn't assume the widths are exact unless the code was *only* ever
intended to be used with a specific model. (I've used POSIX-based
systems with 64-bit short, for example.)
If I want exact-width types, I know where to find them.
--
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 | 2025-03-19 12:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <86jz8kpzam.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #391339 |
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: > On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 00:38:44 -0400 > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > >> On 3/18/2025 11:07 PM, Tim Rentsch wrote: >> >> >>> Have you thought about how large the value of 'n' can >>> become inside the while() loop? >> >> I was too smug in my first reply. After Keith pointed out I needed >> to read from stdin, I submitted the code again and it passed some >> tests but failed with 'OUTPUT LIMIT EXCEEDED' when n = 159487. >> >> Updating int to long worked, and now I'm bona fide! >> >> So thanks. > > What you did happens to be sufficient for a particular environment > (supposedly, x86-64 Linux) used both by yourself and by the server that > tests results. > In more general case, 'long' is not guaranteed to handle numbers in > range up to 18,997,161,173 that can happen in this test. The number 18997161173 is odd. The largest value reached is three times that, plus 1, which is 56991483520. > Something like int64_t would be safer. Using unsigned long long is safer still, and easier, because there is no need for hoop-jumping to print them out with printx.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-19 22:12 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20250319221227.00001f8c@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #391371 |
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 12:59:13 -0700 Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: > > > On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 00:38:44 -0400 > > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > > > >> On 3/18/2025 11:07 PM, Tim Rentsch wrote: > >> > >> > >>> Have you thought about how large the value of 'n' can > >>> become inside the while() loop? > >> > >> I was too smug in my first reply. After Keith pointed out I needed > >> to read from stdin, I submitted the code again and it passed some > >> tests but failed with 'OUTPUT LIMIT EXCEEDED' when n = 159487. > >> > >> Updating int to long worked, and now I'm bona fide! > >> > >> So thanks. > > > > What you did happens to be sufficient for a particular environment > > (supposedly, x86-64 Linux) used both by yourself and by the server > > that tests results. > > In more general case, 'long' is not guaranteed to handle numbers in > > range up to 18,997,161,173 that can happen in this test. > > The number 18997161173 is odd. The largest value reached is three > times that, plus 1, which is 56991483520. > Yes, my mistake. I only looked for maximal odd number in the sequence. Forgot about even numbers. > > Something like int64_t would be safer. > > Using unsigned long long is safer still, and easier, because there > is no need for hoop-jumping to print them out with printx. I explained the reason in the reply to Richard Heathfield.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-20 05:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <86iko3opxl.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #391372 |
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: > On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 12:59:13 -0700 > Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > >> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: >> >>> On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 00:38:44 -0400 >>> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 3/18/2025 11:07 PM, Tim Rentsch wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Have you thought about how large the value of 'n' can >>>>> become inside the while() loop? >>>> >>>> I was too smug in my first reply. After Keith pointed out I needed >>>> to read from stdin, I submitted the code again and it passed some >>>> tests but failed with 'OUTPUT LIMIT EXCEEDED' when n = 159487. >>>> >>>> Updating int to long worked, and now I'm bona fide! >>>> >>>> So thanks. >>> >>> What you did happens to be sufficient for a particular environment >>> (supposedly, x86-64 Linux) used both by yourself and by the server >>> that tests results. >>> In more general case, 'long' is not guaranteed to handle numbers in >>> range up to 18,997,161,173 that can happen in this test. >> >> The number 18997161173 is odd. The largest value reached is three >> times that, plus 1, which is 56991483520. > > Yes, my mistake. > I only looked for maximal odd number in the sequence. Forgot about > even numbers. Yes, I realized that, after the fact. >>> Something like int64_t would be safer. >> >> Using unsigned long long is safer still, and easier, because there >> is no need for hoop-jumping to print them out with printx. > > I explained the reason in the reply to Richard Heathfield. Yes I saw that. Part of my motivation for the comment is to augment the knowledge of those who aren't sure.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-18 20:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87a59hvgyk.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #391319 |
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes:
> I'm doing these algorithm problems at
> https://cses.fi/problemset/list/
>
> For instance: Weird Algorithm
> https://cses.fi/problemset/task/1068
>
> My code works fine locally (prints the correct solution to the
> console), but when I submit the .c file the auto-tester flags it with
> 'runtime error' and says the output is empty.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> // If n is even, divide it by two.
> // If n is odd, multiply it by three and add one.
> // Repeat until n is one.
> // n = 3: output is 3 10 5 16 8 4 2 1
>
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <string.h>
>
> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> int n = atoi(argv[1]);
[...]
There's your problem.
https://cses.fi/problemset/text/2433
"In all problems you should read input from standard input and write
output to standard output."
The autotester expects your program to read arguments from stdin, not
from command line arguments.
It probably passes no arguments to your program, so argv[1] is a null
pointer. It's likely your program compiles (assuming the NBSP
characters were added during posting) and crashes at runtime, producing
no output.
--
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 | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-03-19 00:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vrdi0g$47cb$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391325 |
On 3/18/2025 11:26 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes:
> There's your problem.
>
> https://cses.fi/problemset/text/2433
>
> "In all problems you should read input from standard input and write
> output to standard output."
ha! It usually helps to read the instructions first.
> The autotester expects your program to read arguments from stdin, not
> from command line arguments.
>
> It probably passes no arguments to your program, so argv[1] is a null
> pointer. It's likely your program compiles (assuming the NBSP
> characters were added during posting) and crashes at runtime, producing
> no output.
I KNEW clc would come through!
Pretty easy fixes:
1 use scanf()
2 update int to long
3 handle special case of n = 1
4 instead of collecting the results in a char variable, I print
them as they're calculated
The algorithm part was very simple and correct. Later ones won't be so
easy. I coded 4 so far (but just submitted this one here), and plan on
doing all 300.
https://imgur.com/bq0pKIw
Did you hear a boom?
Thanks again!
updated code that passes:
===============================================================
// If n is even, divide it by two.
// If n is odd, multiply it by three and add one.
// Repeat until n is one.
// example: the sequence for n=3 is 3 10 5 16 8 4 2 1
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
long n = 0;
scanf("%ld", &n);
printf("%ld ",n);
while(1) {
if(n==1) {exit(0);}
if((n % 2) == 0)
{n /= 2;}
else
{n = (n * 3) + 1;}
if(n != 1)
{printf("%ld ",n);}
else
break;
}
printf("1\n");
return 0;
}
===============================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 18 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 16 17 [18] 19 20 … 22 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web