Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #124080 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-12-09 16:20 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-12-24 21:04 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 320 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-09 16:20 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-10 00:31 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? gordonb.k2333@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2017-12-09 20:40 -0600
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 02:21 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-10 11:50 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 04:19 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 04:32 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 04:43 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 05:03 -0800
Who's a troll now? (Was: Auto-execute code at exit?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-12-10 14:01 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-11 15:19 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 15:46 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 08:04 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 18:35 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 11:09 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 20:28 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 12:38 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:07 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 11:45 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 13:50 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 19:29 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-13 08:52 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 23:04 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 21:08 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 21:40 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 23:22 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-12 15:54 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 00:11 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 17:38 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 10:44 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-13 03:12 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 10:16 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-12 09:35 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 20:42 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:02 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-12 21:34 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-11 18:37 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2017-12-11 19:39 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gordon Burditt <gordon@hammy.burditt.org> - 2017-12-12 20:54 -0600
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-12-09 19:32 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-10 13:36 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-09 17:14 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-12-09 21:49 -0700
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-12-10 11:04 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 20:22 +0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-10 18:10 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-10 20:48 +0000
Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-10 10:59 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-10 20:37 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-12-10 15:58 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-10 22:59 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-11 02:34 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 15:33 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-11 16:42 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 15:52 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-12-11 15:53 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-12-11 17:09 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 08:18 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-12-11 19:04 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 08:19 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 17:26 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 09:40 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 18:09 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 11:07 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 20:18 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 12:27 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-12-11 13:42 -0700
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 12:54 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-12-11 19:34 -0700
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-11 17:46 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-11 19:31 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 18:48 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:36 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-12-11 18:49 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-11 20:33 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 12:39 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-11 21:22 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 13:25 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 05:45 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 21:00 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-11 13:13 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 21:45 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-12 10:46 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-11 14:04 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 05:42 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-11 13:53 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-11 21:21 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 21:53 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 08:01 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 18:00 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 11:01 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 20:44 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 12:52 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 21:16 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 13:24 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:55 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2017-12-11 22:00 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 21:43 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:52 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-11 21:41 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 22:33 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-12 01:17 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 01:44 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 10:01 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 11:17 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-12 03:40 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 12:01 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-12 04:50 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 18:33 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 10:37 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-12-12 21:43 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-12 11:31 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 20:09 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 13:56 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 19:44 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-13 09:07 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 23:28 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 00:08 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-12-13 01:42 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-13 16:35 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 10:55 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-13 11:04 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-12-13 11:45 -0600
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 13:36 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-14 07:34 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-13 03:20 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 11:25 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 11:50 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 14:27 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 14:31 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 16:56 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 19:27 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 21:15 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 22:48 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-14 07:44 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-14 06:55 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-14 00:32 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-15 00:01 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-15 00:48 -0800
Why post to Usenet? (Was: Auto-execute code at exit?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-12-15 10:51 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-15 12:18 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-15 17:40 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-15 20:12 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2017-12-15 12:54 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-15 13:51 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-16 14:46 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-15 23:20 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-16 00:36 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-16 01:34 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2017-12-16 20:06 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-17 17:33 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-17 21:35 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-17 15:06 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-18 12:41 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-12-18 03:36 -0600
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 11:51 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 12:02 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 12:43 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 15:07 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 16:07 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 20:50 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 13:57 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 15:36 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 21:04 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 09:08 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 20:51 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-18 15:37 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 16:28 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 10:59 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 19:35 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 19:55 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-18 20:48 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-18 13:03 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-18 21:14 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 00:08 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 16:58 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 01:28 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-19 14:35 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 01:45 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-19 01:49 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 02:54 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-19 14:45 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-19 07:48 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 16:00 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-19 17:42 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-19 17:19 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-19 09:43 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-19 18:57 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-19 09:33 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 18:34 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-19 11:05 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2017-12-18 21:09 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 20:38 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-19 13:35 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 01:00 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-19 14:04 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-20 13:42 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-20 15:52 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-20 15:42 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-20 08:16 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-20 18:25 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-20 10:48 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-20 20:43 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-20 12:44 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-21 15:18 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-21 09:45 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-21 20:08 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-21 12:33 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-21 22:42 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-21 15:20 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-22 09:57 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-22 08:21 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-23 13:32 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-23 19:35 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-26 12:08 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-26 12:36 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-27 10:38 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-27 08:14 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-12-27 09:50 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-20 12:12 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-20 18:16 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-20 19:41 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-20 22:52 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-20 15:39 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-21 13:02 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-21 00:50 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-20 18:22 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-21 12:10 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-21 13:10 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-21 20:55 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-21 21:37 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-22 01:50 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 12:14 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-22 17:01 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 17:34 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-22 09:52 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-22 12:02 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 20:18 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-22 12:39 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 23:10 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-22 17:05 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-23 02:17 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-12-22 22:14 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-23 14:43 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-23 14:31 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-24 09:45 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-23 16:28 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-23 11:23 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-12-23 13:24 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-24 09:29 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-21 20:57 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-21 13:11 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-21 21:58 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-12-21 14:03 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 01:34 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-12-22 07:55 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-22 16:41 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-12-22 12:46 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-23 11:57 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-12-23 08:12 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-23 21:02 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-12-23 16:13 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-23 22:15 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-23 14:45 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-23 15:47 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-12-23 19:34 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-24 12:08 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-24 12:11 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-24 12:17 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-12-24 05:49 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-24 13:06 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-23 13:51 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-23 22:17 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-22 18:37 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 19:03 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-20 17:44 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 17:22 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 01:41 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-19 09:54 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 13:24 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-19 14:43 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-19 09:02 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2017-12-18 20:58 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 22:36 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-18 20:37 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 09:13 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-18 20:51 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 09:03 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-18 19:13 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 11:28 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 10:07 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-18 07:50 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-16 12:21 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-15 09:51 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-14 12:08 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-14 05:13 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-12-13 09:21 -0700
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 19:27 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 15:14 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 17:11 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-13 00:29 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-13 00:41 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-14 06:51 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-14 14:40 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-14 17:15 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-14 18:59 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:48 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-11 17:40 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-11 10:57 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 13:56 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 14:09 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 14:18 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2017-12-10 14:51 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2017-12-23 11:08 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2017-12-25 00:49 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 00:29 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 18:30 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 11:09 -0800
Auto-execute code at exit? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2017-12-10 15:05 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mcheung63@gmail.com - 2017-12-24 21:04 -0800
Page 6 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 16 Next page →
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-11 22:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fIDXB.160622$3X1.83153@fx28.am4> |
| In reply to | #124191 |
On 11/12/2017 21:41, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>
>> On 11/12/2017 16:01, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>> On Monday, December 11, 2017 at 10:33:47 AM UTC-5, Bart wrote:
>>
>>> In my experience, C is about as clean as it gets
> <snip>
>
>> You really think C has clean syntax?
>>
>> C: for (i=1; i<=20; ++i) printf("%d %f\n", i, sqrt(i));
>>
>> M: for i to 20 do println i,sqrt i od
>
> What about
>
> C: for (int i = 0; i < 20; i += 2) printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt(i));
> ? My point (not a very obscure one but it's best to be clear) is that
> your C example seems to map to what M does "by default" so the
> comparison might be skewed.
I think 1..20 was the actual range used in the original 1975 Basic
program. And that just used plain PRINT (which may have had fixed sized
widths so that things lined up).
My compiled language doesn't implement formatted print, so there I would
probably just use:
for i:=0 to 19 do printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt i) od
(Output shown after sig.)
With the following changes to the table (disregarding the more elaborate
format codes as they are the same in C):
C M
Parentheses: 6 2
Semicolons: 3 0
Operators: 3 1
Format codes: 2 2
Strings: 1 1
Escape codes: 1 1
Commas: 2 2
How many i's: 5 3
Braces: 2 0 (for multi-stmt loop or mandatory braces)
> You didn't count keywords.
Keywords are easy to type. I've added an entry for braces, as C may need
them, but the other syntax already uses do...od.
> Of course some of these higher counts are in
> C's favour: having a newline escape is, in my opinion, better than
> having more than one kind of print statement (or function).
Newlines after print are /very/ common. Typing an extra -ln is easier
than \n (and \ is in a different place on every keyboard).
The other option is to always generate a newline, with some complicated
way of suppressing it (like Python), which is more work than either -ln
or \n, and untidier than either.
And some
> people might argue that having *some* parentheses is cleaner than having
> none.
Mostly keywords (Lisp) or mostly operators and punctuation (K?) does
make for hard-to-read syntax.
But I think the balance in the Algol68-style syntax is reasonable
(Algol68 had a few more keywords actually like FROM and OF). C does have
rather more punctuation than is necessary.
> By the way, I agree that it's a stretch to say that C's syntax is as
> clean as it gets. I just don't think it's this simple to compare.
Agreement for a change.
--
bartc
--------------------------------------------
import clib
proc start =
int i
for i:=0 to 19 do
printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt i)
od
end
--------------------------------------------
Output:
0 0.000
1 1.000
2 1.414
3 1.732
4 2.000
5 2.236
6 2.449
7 2.646
8 2.828
9 3.000
10 3.162
11 3.317
12 3.464
13 3.606
14 3.742
15 3.873
16 4.000
17 4.123
18 4.243
19 4.359
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 01:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87wp1szqv9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #124199 |
bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 11/12/2017 21:41, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 11/12/2017 16:01, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>>> On Monday, December 11, 2017 at 10:33:47 AM UTC-5, Bart wrote:
>>>
>>>> In my experience, C is about as clean as it gets
>> <snip>
>>
>>> You really think C has clean syntax?
>>>
>>> C: for (i=1; i<=20; ++i) printf("%d %f\n", i, sqrt(i));
>>>
>>> M: for i to 20 do println i,sqrt i od
>>
>> What about
>>
>> C: for (int i = 0; i < 20; i += 2) printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt(i));
>
>> ? My point (not a very obscure one but it's best to be clear) is that
>> your C example seems to map to what M does "by default" so the
>> comparison might be skewed.
>
> I think 1..20 was the actual range used in the original 1975 Basic
> program. And that just used plain PRINT (which may have had fixed
> sized widths so that things lined up).
I'm not sure how this is relevant. The comparison can be skewed no
matter where the example comes from.
> My compiled language doesn't implement formatted print,
How do you control the output then?
> so there I
> would probably just use:
>
> for i:=0 to 19 do printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt i) od
That does not have a scope-limited index variable and does not duplicate
the C example I gave.
And I am now confused -- you said your language does not have a
formatted print operation but you are offering a translation. (And why
does printf have ()s and sqrt does not?)
<snip>
>> You didn't count keywords.
>
> Keywords are easy to type. I've added an entry for braces, as C may
> need them, but the other syntax already uses do...od.
<snip>
>> Of course some of these higher counts are in
>> C's favour: having a newline escape is, in my opinion, better than
>> having more than one kind of print statement (or function).
>
> Newlines after print are /very/ common. Typing an extra -ln is easier
> than \n (and \ is in a different place on every keyboard).
I've never found these things to matter to me. I find programming
sufficiently hard that the amount of effort used to type the code is
almost insignificant. Anyway the point was about "clean" syntax -- Rick
did not say "C is the easiest to type".
<snip>
> Mostly keywords (Lisp) or mostly operators and punctuation (K?) does
> make for hard-to-read syntax.
>
> But I think the balance in the Algol68-style syntax is reasonable
> (Algol68 had a few more keywords actually like FROM and OF). C does
> have rather more punctuation than is necessary.
Algol-68 did not really have a syntax in the relevant sense. For
example you can often use keywords *or* punctuation so it's an odd
example of language that gets a good balance between those two. Anyway,
I think any language whose implementations had "stropping" forfeits any
claim to clean syntax.
<snip>
--
Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 01:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <BvGXB.128187$x74.102834@fx33.am4> |
| In reply to | #124200 |
On 12/12/2017 01:17, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> I'm not sure how this is relevant. The comparison can be skewed no
> matter where the example comes from.
It's relevant because it was a real example (not mine) and not
contrived. Not much...
>> My compiled language doesn't implement formatted print,
>
> How do you control the output then?
That doesn't come up often, when it does I usually call C's sprintf.
(Or I will be using my other higher level language that does have some
formatting, and also string processing. Not that that is much clearer
for your print example:
println i:"3", sqrt i:"5.3"
But doing complicated i/o formatting requires a mini-language of its
own, and is getting away from the main language. The issue with C is
that it /requires/ format codes even when you don't care.)
> And I am now confused -- you said your language does not have a
> formatted print operation but you are offering a translation.
It's not a translation (look at the full program I gave after my sig).
It's calling C's printf as a foreign function. I suppose calling
familiar C functions within a different language can look confusing.
> (And why
> does printf have ()s and sqrt does not?)
The fragment is still my language, and there sqrt is a built-in
operator, not a function.
(I posted a good comparison (between my syntax and C's) a few years ago
involving function pointers, I'll see if I can find it.)
> Algol-68 did not really have a syntax in the relevant sense. For
> example you can often use keywords *or* punctuation so it's an odd
> example of language that gets a good balance between those two. Anyway,
> I think any language whose implementations had "stropping" forfeits any
> claim to clean syntax.
No, practical examples of Algol68 look awful. I would have dropped the
ability to have spaces within identifiers in order to have
better-looking source and not to have to wear out your caps lock key.
--
bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 10:01 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <p0o5sm$55b$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #124199 |
On 11/12/17 23:33, bartc wrote:
> On 11/12/2017 21:41, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 11/12/2017 16:01, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>>> On Monday, December 11, 2017 at 10:33:47 AM UTC-5, Bart wrote:
>>>
>>>> In my experience, C is about as clean as it gets
>> <snip>
>>
>>> You really think C has clean syntax?
>>>
>>> C: for (i=1; i<=20; ++i) printf("%d %f\n", i, sqrt(i));
>>>
>>> M: for i to 20 do println i,sqrt i od
>>
>> What about
>>
>> C: for (int i = 0; i < 20; i += 2) printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt(i));
>
>
>> ? My point (not a very obscure one but it's best to be clear) is that
>> your C example seems to map to what M does "by default" so the
>> comparison might be skewed.
>
> I think 1..20 was the actual range used in the original 1975 Basic
> program. And that just used plain PRINT (which may have had fixed sized
> widths so that things lined up).
>
> My compiled language doesn't implement formatted print, so there I would
> probably just use:
>
> for i:=0 to 19 do printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt i) od
>
Ben's example increments i by 2 each round.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 11:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <AUOXB.169293$M61.162783@fx38.am4> |
| In reply to | #124213 |
On 12/12/2017 09:01, David Brown wrote:
> On 11/12/17 23:33, bartc wrote:
>> On 11/12/2017 21:41, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 11/12/2017 16:01, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, December 11, 2017 at 10:33:47 AM UTC-5, Bart wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In my experience, C is about as clean as it gets
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> You really think C has clean syntax?
>>>>
>>>> C: for (i=1; i<=20; ++i) printf("%d %f\n", i, sqrt(i));
>>>>
>>>> M: for i to 20 do println i,sqrt i od
>>>
>>> What about
>>>
>>> C: for (int i = 0; i < 20; i += 2) printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt(i));
>>
>>
>>> ? My point (not a very obscure one but it's best to be clear) is that
>>> your C example seems to map to what M does "by default" so the
>>> comparison might be skewed.
>>
>> I think 1..20 was the actual range used in the original 1975 Basic
>> program. And that just used plain PRINT (which may have had fixed sized
>> widths so that things lined up).
>>
>> My compiled language doesn't implement formatted print, so there I would
>> probably just use:
>>
>> for i:=0 to 19 do printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt i) od
>>
>
> Ben's example increments i by 2 each round.
Does it? I hadn't noticed! That's one flaw with the busy for-loop syntax
of C - the structure of the loop header is the same whether the
increment is one or two, so differences are less noticeable.
My version becomes:
for i:=0 to 19 by 2 do printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt i) od
(I can't do a local scope for 'i', as the language doesn't support that.
Neither does Python; it's not a big deal.)
--
bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mark.bluemel@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 03:40 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <418f09b1-d1ab-4ba0-ae90-ccb0a5389b09@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #124214 |
On Tuesday, 12 December 2017 11:17:06 UTC, Bart wrote:
> On 12/12/2017 09:01, David Brown wrote:
> > On 11/12/17 23:33, bartc wrote:
> >> On 11/12/2017 21:41, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> >>> What about
> >>>
> >>> C: for (int i = 0; i < 20; i += 2) printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt(i));
...
> > Ben's example increments i by 2 each round.
>
> Does it? I hadn't noticed!
And that tells us all we need to know.
> That's one flaw with the busy for-loop syntax
> of C - the structure of the loop header is the same whether the
> increment is one or two, so differences are less noticeable.
But of course it's all the language's fault.
And here we go again...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 12:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jyPXB.151990$321.29701@fx12.am4> |
| In reply to | #124215 |
On 12/12/2017 11:40, mark.bluemel@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 12 December 2017 11:17:06 UTC, Bart wrote:
>> On 12/12/2017 09:01, David Brown wrote:
>>> On 11/12/17 23:33, bartc wrote:
>>>> On 11/12/2017 21:41, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>
>>>>> What about
>>>>>
>>>>> C: for (int i = 0; i < 20; i += 2) printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt(i));
> ...
>>> Ben's example increments i by 2 each round.
>>
>> Does it? I hadn't noticed!
>
> And that tells us all we need to know.
OK, you win; C /does/ has beautifully clean, uncluttered syntax.
Because the aficionados on clc say so.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mark.bluemel@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 04:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <453d7b21-809c-49bd-949a-f49c71f870c6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #124217 |
On Tuesday, 12 December 2017 12:01:35 UTC, Bart wrote:
> On 12/12/2017 11:40, I wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 12 December 2017 11:17:06 UTC, Bart wrote:
> >> On 12/12/2017 09:01, David Brown wrote:
> >>> On 11/12/17 23:33, bartc wrote:
> >>>> On 11/12/2017 21:41, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>>> What about
> >>>>>
> >>>>> C: for (int i = 0; i < 20; i += 2) printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt(i));
> > ...
> >>> Ben's example increments i by 2 each round.
> >>
> >> Does it? I hadn't noticed!
> >
> > And that tells us all we need to know.
>
> OK, you win; C /does/ has beautifully clean, uncluttered syntax.
Don't go building another straw man, Bart.
I'm not making any claim about the aesthetic merit or otherwise
of the C language.
Here's my point:-
Ben's example wasn't complex, and any one who
a) understood the basics of the language (I'm not saying they have to like them)
and
b) took a few moments to actually examine what Ben wrote
would be able to understand it.
If you didn't understand it, it seems that either a) or b) does not apply.
I'm prepared to believe you understand the language well enough to
parse that simple loop , so I'm assuming you didn't take the time to
actually read it properly.
That tells us something about you - that you don't put the effort
into understanding another's point before trying to contradict it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 18:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87efnzn6dg.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #124219 |
mark.bluemel@gmail.com writes: > Here's my point:- > > Ben's example wasn't complex, and any one who > a) understood the basics of the language (I'm not saying they have to > like them) > and > b) took a few moments to actually examine what Ben wrote > would be able to understand it. > > If you didn't understand it, it seems that either a) or b) does not apply. c) Isn't dumber than a box of rocks > I'm prepared to believe you understand the language well enough to > parse that simple loop , so I'm assuming you didn't take the time to > actually read it properly. It was (c) > That tells us something about you - that you don't put the effort > into understanding another's point before trying to contradict it. Or (c)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 10:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c881d40a-aab1-4c6b-9db5-062a2297437e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #124225 |
On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 1:33:55 PM UTC-5, gwowen wrote: > [snip] Why are you always mean to people, gwowen? Is that the kind of world you want to live in? Where people are consistently taking little pot shots at everybody? Do you ever make mistakes or think of things in different ways than other people or have bad days? Why attack people because they are different? If you're aware that your position is the correct one, then guide people to that knowledge. If you're not sure, then listen more and maybe you'll solidify your position, or even change it. It's just better to try and lift people up, than to knock them down. -- Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 21:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p0pih9$d45$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #124226 |
In article <c881d40a-aab1-4c6b-9db5-062a2297437e@googlegroups.com>, Rick C. Hodgin <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> wrote: ... >It's just better to try and lift people up, than to knock them down. (All together now) No, it's not. -- Which of these is the crazier bit of right wing lunacy? 1) We've just had another mass shooting; now is not the time to be talking about gun control. 2) We've just had a massive hurricane; now is not the time to be talking about climate change.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 11:31 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lny3m7oi8t.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #124225 |
Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> writes:
> mark.bluemel@gmail.com writes:
[...]
>> If you didn't understand it, it seems that either a) or b) does not apply.
>
> c) Isn't dumber than a box of rocks
Gareth, I think everyone is aware by now of your opinion. No need to
repeat it.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 20:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87tvwvogi9.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #124229 |
Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes: > Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> writes: >> mark.bluemel@gmail.com writes: > [...] >>> If you didn't understand it, it seems that either a) or b) does not apply. >> >> c) Isn't dumber than a box of rocks > > Gareth, I think everyone is aware by now of your opinion. No need to > repeat it. Your opinions on my opinions are off-topic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 13:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <p0ojmo$thk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #124214 |
On 12/12/17 12:17, bartc wrote:
> On 12/12/2017 09:01, David Brown wrote:
>> On 11/12/17 23:33, bartc wrote:
>>> On 11/12/2017 21:41, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/12/2017 16:01, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, December 11, 2017 at 10:33:47 AM UTC-5, Bart wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In my experience, C is about as clean as it gets
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>> You really think C has clean syntax?
>>>>>
>>>>> C: for (i=1; i<=20; ++i) printf("%d %f\n", i, sqrt(i));
>>>>>
>>>>> M: for i to 20 do println i,sqrt i od
>>>>
>>>> What about
>>>>
>>>> C: for (int i = 0; i < 20; i += 2) printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt(i));
>>>
>>>
>>>> ? My point (not a very obscure one but it's best to be clear) is that
>>>> your C example seems to map to what M does "by default" so the
>>>> comparison might be skewed.
>>>
>>> I think 1..20 was the actual range used in the original 1975 Basic
>>> program. And that just used plain PRINT (which may have had fixed sized
>>> widths so that things lined up).
>>>
>>> My compiled language doesn't implement formatted print, so there I would
>>> probably just use:
>>>
>>> for i:=0 to 19 do printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt i) od
>>>
>>
>> Ben's example increments i by 2 each round.
>
> Does it? I hadn't noticed! That's one flaw with the busy for-loop syntax
> of C - the structure of the loop header is the same whether the
> increment is one or two, so differences are less noticeable.
>
I would say it is a flaw in your reading - or in your enthusiasm for
posting.
> My version becomes:
>
> for i:=0 to 19 by 2 do printf("%3d %5.3f\n", i, sqrt i) od
>
At this stage, what you have is almost a direct translation of the C
code. I can't see how you can think it is so much "cleaner" or better.
(It is not worse either, it's about the same - just irrelevant syntax
details.)
> (I can't do a local scope for 'i', as the language doesn't support that.
> Neither does Python; it's not a big deal.)
>
Yes, local scope is a big deal. You don't use it when programming in C,
so you don't know what you are missing. As a C programmer (actual C,
not just an artificially stunted subset of C89), I use local scopes all
the time - and when I do Python coding, it is a feature I miss. In
Python you don't have to declare everything at the top of the function,
as you do in your style of coding, so it is not that bad - basically, it
just means you have vastly inferior static error checking compared to C
coding.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 19:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <8kWXB.348094$ej.119316@fx46.am4> |
| In reply to | #124220 |
On 12/12/2017 12:56, David Brown wrote: > On 12/12/17 12:17, bartc wrote: > I would say it is a flaw in your reading - or in your enthusiasm for > posting. The point of my example was to show that the simplest example: 10 FOR I=1 TO 20 20 PRINT I,SQR(I) REM can't remember if "," or ";" 30 NEXT I would be swamped in C by lots of irrelevant details and by excessive punctuation, as shown by my comparison table. Ben decided a more contrived example full of extra details that /had/ to make an appearance in both lots of code was better. So yes in that case the difference between the two code fragments was narrower. Because those details were mandatory in C, but optional in the other language. >> (I can't do a local scope for 'i', as the language doesn't support that. >> Neither does Python; it's not a big deal.) >> > > Yes, local scope is a big deal. You don't use it when programming in C, > so you don't know what you are missing > As a C programmer (actual C, > not just an artificially stunted subset of C89), I use local scopes all > the time - and when I do Python coding, it is a feature I miss. I can imagine what your code looks like. But there are reasons I don't like it; for example, one of my current projects has to exist as compiled and interpreted versions. When I make a fix to one, then I just port the same lines, unchanged, to the other. I don't need to do any changes because the two language use the same syntax, and the compiled one doesn't have in-place declarations cluttering up the code. That makes it harder to read, and harder to port. (Changes are made on compiled, and copied to interpreted. Going the other way would be harder because the code might use higher level features that don't exist in the other language, and I need to add declarations for any new variables used.) > Python you don't have to declare everything at the top of the function, > as you do in your style of coding, so it is not that bad - basically, it > just means you have vastly inferior static error checking compared to C > coding. You're not factoring in all the code that will never have any errors because you don't need to write it. -- Bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-13 09:07 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <f9ar85F37deU9@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #124232 |
On 12/13/2017 08:44 AM, bartc wrote: > On 12/12/2017 12:56, David Brown wrote: >> On 12/12/17 12:17, bartc wrote: > >> I would say it is a flaw in your reading - or in your enthusiasm for >> posting. > > The point of my example was to show that the simplest example: > > 10 FOR I=1 TO 20 > 20 PRINT I,SQR(I) REM can't remember if "," or ";" > 30 NEXT I > > would be swamped in C by lots of irrelevant details and by excessive > punctuation, as shown by my comparison table. > > Ben decided a more contrived example full of extra details that /had/ to > make an appearance in both lots of code was better. s/contrived/realistic/ > So yes in that case the difference between the two code fragments was > narrower. Because those details were mandatory in C, but optional in the > other language. s/details/versatility/ If you want formatted output, the format specification is going to be busy. -- Ian.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-12 23:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <p0pl6g$pmb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #124232 |
On 12/12/17 20:44, bartc wrote: > On 12/12/2017 12:56, David Brown wrote: >> On 12/12/17 12:17, bartc wrote: > >> I would say it is a flaw in your reading - or in your enthusiasm for >> posting. > > The point of my example was to show that the simplest example: > > 10 FOR I=1 TO 20 > 20 PRINT I,SQR(I) REM can't remember if "," or ";" > 30 NEXT I > > would be swamped in C by lots of irrelevant details and by excessive > punctuation, as shown by my comparison table. Well, if that was your point - it failed. There was no "swamping", and the C code was clear to anyone who has spent more than an hour trying to learn the language (rather than spending a decade trying to hate it). And once the code went a step beyond the very simple example, the C code was still clear and obvious, fitting the same pattern - while your own language needed a complete re-write. > > Ben decided a more contrived example full of extra details that /had/ to > make an appearance in both lots of code was better. > > So yes in that case the difference between the two code fragments was > narrower. Because those details were mandatory in C, but optional in the > other language. > > >>> (I can't do a local scope for 'i', as the language doesn't support that. >>> Neither does Python; it's not a big deal.) >>> >> >> Yes, local scope is a big deal. You don't use it when programming in C, >> so you don't know what you are missing >> As a C programmer (actual C, >> not just an artificially stunted subset of C89), I use local scopes all >> the time - and when I do Python coding, it is a feature I miss. > > I can imagine what your code looks like. I doubt it. > But there are reasons I don't > like it; for example, one of my current projects has to exist as > compiled and interpreted versions. > > When I make a fix to one, then I just port the same lines, unchanged, to > the other. > > I don't need to do any changes because the two language use the same > syntax, and the compiled one doesn't have in-place declarations > cluttering up the code. That makes it harder to read, and harder to port. If you are writing the same code in your two different private languages, then you need to write it within their limitations. I write in C, and thus don't have that problem. So I write with local scopes, because it makes the code easier to write, easier to read, easier to maintain, and gives more powerful automatic checking. > > (Changes are made on compiled, and copied to interpreted. Going the > other way would be harder because the code might use higher level > features that don't exist in the other language, and I need to add > declarations for any new variables used.) > >> Python you don't have to declare everything at the top of the function, >> as you do in your style of coding, so it is not that bad - basically, it >> just means you have vastly inferior static error checking compared to C >> coding. > > You're not factoring in all the code that will never have any errors > because you don't need to write it. I do factor that in - that is one of the main reasons I program in Python rather than C for code on PC's.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-13 00:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <Zb_XB.260312$XT.179000@fx37.am4> |
| In reply to | #124247 |
On 12/12/2017 22:28, David Brown wrote: > On 12/12/17 20:44, bartc wrote: >> On 12/12/2017 12:56, David Brown wrote: >>> On 12/12/17 12:17, bartc wrote: >> >>> I would say it is a flaw in your reading - or in your enthusiasm for >>> posting. >> >> The point of my example was to show that the simplest example: >> >> 10 FOR I=1 TO 20 >> 20 PRINT I,SQR(I) REM can't remember if "," or ";" >> 30 NEXT I >> >> would be swamped in C by lots of irrelevant details and by excessive >> punctuation, as shown by my comparison table. > > Well, if that was your point - it failed. There was no "swamping", Yes there was. Didn't you see the table which listed 23 extra special symbols versus the 4 of my code? (Counting all tokens and format elements, there 27 in C versus 11 in mine. Even with the revised one, mine still had fewer elements.) and > the C code was clear to anyone who has spent more than an hour trying to > learn the language (rather than spending a decade trying to hate it). A one line example? Sure. The problem is when you're in the middle of 50,000 lines of someone else's horrendous code, and half the reason it is horrendous is because C ALLOWS IT. > And once the code went a step beyond the very simple example, the C code > was still clear and obvious, fitting the same pattern - while your own > language needed a complete re-write. You've got that back to front. In the two code fragments, with the C you had to write the more complicated code both times, with mine only once. But if you are talking about things that need rewriting, let's take a look at C: (1) In-place declarations: you decide you need to use a certain variable earlier on, you now have to move the declaration. And if you forget, and it shadows an outer one, yet get a bug. [Mine: there are no block scopes and variables can be declared out of order, so it can't happen.] (2) Function signature: change the parameters in the definition (not enough to need to change any calls), and you need change the corresponding declaration in a header or a forward declaration in the file. [Mine: there are no separate declarations needed, so no extra work.] (3) Function signature: you decide one or two calls need an extra parameter. You need to add the parameter to the definition, then you need to change any declarations as in (2), but also you have to update EVERY call to the function. [Mine: an extra parameter can be added as an optional parameter with a default value, so that only calls using that parameter need changing.] (4) Print formats: change the type of some variable, and the format code of every printf involving that variable or an expression using that variable, may need updating. [Mine: the built-in print statement doesn't use format codes. This is only relevant when I call sprintf, and that is rare compared to the use of built-in print.] (5) Move or insert functions within a module, and you may need to add forward declarations if a function calls another later on in the module. Or you need to spend timing re-ordering the functions. [Mine: functions can be defined in any order.] (6) The same applies to shared variables as to the functions in (2): change a detail of the type, and both declarations needed updating. Sometimes you might get away with having a single declaration, if a variable is not initialised, but that means hiding the declaration in a header instead of in its home module. [Mine: a shared variable, even initialised, is declared once in its home module where it belongs.] (7) Parallel tables: You have a set of enums, and matching sets of parallel arrays (names), values etc which have to correspond. Add, delete, insert or move entries, and all arrays must be adjusted. Sometimes, macro techniques can be used to all updates in one place, but the macro must be devised, and it adds an extra level of obfuscation to the code. [Mine: a built-in language feature exactly this kinds of tables to be easily created and updated. No macros needed] (8) Things like sizeof(A)/sizeof(A[0]), min, max, swap etc all require a million programmers to reinvent macros for them every time (either that or they have to keep rewriting that boilerplate code, even worse). [Mine: this stuff is all built-in] That'll do I think. I'm sure you won't be convinced and that C is still superior to anything I might think up. > If you are writing the same code in your two different private > languages, then you need to write it within their limitations. I write > in C, and thus don't have that problem. Try writing in C, then porting it to Python. That's effectively what I'm doing here. Good luck doing it with a sizeable block of code with no changes (but no doubt you will have some hairy Python2C tool to do the job!). But more usually I go the other way, so trying taking Python code, and port it to C. I will have an easier job with my two languages as the syntax is largely the same. Even less rewriting to do. -- bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-13 01:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <m2bmj3ihlw.fsf@informatimago.com> |
| In reply to | #124254 |
bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > (8) Things like sizeof(A)/sizeof(A[0]), min, max, swap etc all require > a million programmers to reinvent macros for them every time (either > that or they have to keep rewriting that boilerplate code, even > worse). [Mine: this stuff is all built-in] That. Or you use a library. A library I like very much is libecl. https://gist.github.com/vwood/662109 -- __Pascal J. Bourguignon http://www.informatimago.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-13 16:35 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <f9blg6F37deU10@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #124254 |
On 12/13/2017 01:08 PM, bartc wrote: > > A one line example? Sure. The problem is when you're in the middle of > 50,000 lines of someone else's horrendous code, and half the reason it > is horrendous is because C ALLOWS IT. Can you name a useful general purpose language that prevents horrendous code? -- Ian.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web