Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #387724 > unrolled thread
| Started by | John Forkosh <john@somewhere.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-08-23 22:03 +0000 |
| Last post | 2024-08-26 02:33 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 414 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... John Forkosh <john@somewhere.com> - 2024-08-23 22:03 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-23 23:06 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-23 17:02 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-24 02:26 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-24 14:41 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... John Forkosh <forkosh@somewhere.com> - 2024-08-25 12:09 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-25 17:06 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-25 10:54 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-25 18:10 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-26 21:36 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-25 18:47 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-25 12:58 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-24 20:11 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-24 19:27 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-24 21:12 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-24 18:07 -0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... John Forkosh <forkosh@somewhere.com> - 2024-08-25 12:18 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-25 10:50 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-25 16:55 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-25 16:30 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-25 19:17 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-25 18:17 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2024-08-25 18:20 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-25 18:26 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-28 14:21 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 13:40 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-28 14:51 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-29 10:41 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-30 03:18 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-26 05:41 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-26 12:05 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-26 13:30 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-26 14:54 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-26 12:32 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-26 13:07 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-28 00:49 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-28 01:39 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-28 15:57 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-28 19:26 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-29 00:43 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-29 11:35 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-29 13:35 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-29 14:10 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-29 16:13 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-29 15:40 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-29 16:45 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-29 15:58 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-29 17:06 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-29 18:08 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-29 13:30 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-29 22:29 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-29 15:03 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-29 23:45 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-29 16:32 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-30 00:29 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-30 02:34 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-30 06:44 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-30 13:41 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-31 07:08 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-31 12:45 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-31 14:03 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-01 09:45 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-01 10:44 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-01 18:47 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-01 15:01 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-01 13:11 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-01 13:14 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-01 14:17 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-31 19:11 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-31 19:32 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-31 16:04 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-31 15:10 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-01 13:15 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-01 06:30 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-31 15:31 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-01 00:37 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-31 18:17 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-31 20:01 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-31 20:26 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-01 03:04 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-01 13:07 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-08 06:39 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-08 10:12 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-08 16:37 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-09 10:46 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-09 07:03 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-09 13:06 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-09 08:21 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-17 05:46 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-09 17:29 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-09 14:25 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-17 05:56 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-17 06:57 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-17 19:02 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-17 16:26 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... antispam@fricas.org - 2024-09-18 15:28 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-21 06:00 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-01 13:12 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-07 03:13 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-02 13:03 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-02 13:39 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-02 16:22 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-02 20:43 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-02 15:31 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-02 23:48 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-02 15:52 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-02 23:59 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-02 19:44 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-02 20:04 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-03 16:08 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-09 18:00 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-29 21:24 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-05 15:21 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-05 16:54 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-05 17:37 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-06 10:35 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-06 14:05 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-06 07:56 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-08 11:53 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-09 12:08 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-06 13:23 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-06 19:58 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-06 23:38 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-08 05:23 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-05 19:10 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-06 10:19 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-06 12:34 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-07 01:44 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-07 11:53 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-08 00:05 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-08 12:05 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-08 18:13 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-08 21:18 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-09 01:19 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-09 12:31 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-10 04:40 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-10 11:52 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-10 13:55 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-10 14:30 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-10 16:53 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-10 16:18 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-12 21:09 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-08 22:01 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-08 14:15 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-08 23:33 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-08 16:20 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-09 00:25 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-09 00:29 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-09 02:07 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-09 03:04 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-09 11:14 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-09 16:46 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-09 19:21 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-09 22:04 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-10 09:04 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-10 13:56 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-10 16:28 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-11 23:59 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-12 13:45 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-12 21:28 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-13 16:24 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-11 17:12 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-09 12:08 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-09 16:56 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-08 18:10 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-09 02:06 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-08 20:14 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-09 15:58 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-09 16:21 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-09 17:57 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-09 19:37 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-09 18:46 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-09 21:04 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-09 13:16 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-10 09:19 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-10 12:18 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-10 22:10 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-09 22:33 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-09 16:24 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-09 18:52 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-09 20:07 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-09 20:46 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-09 21:39 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-14 15:07 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-14 15:51 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-10 04:19 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-10 12:49 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-14 15:13 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-09 00:09 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-09 16:50 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-09 13:05 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-09 11:01 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-09 12:28 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-09 12:29 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-08 05:53 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-08 05:58 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-08 17:14 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-08 17:36 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-10 15:24 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-10 17:28 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-11 01:22 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-11 10:34 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-11 15:15 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-11 16:51 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-12 00:32 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-12 01:40 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-13 01:01 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-11 17:20 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-15 20:05 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-16 10:58 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-16 11:30 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-16 14:42 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-16 14:30 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-16 17:40 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-16 12:19 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-16 19:13 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-09-17 17:32 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-18 09:44 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-17 14:08 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-18 10:05 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-18 07:27 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-18 14:15 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-16 19:26 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-09-17 09:27 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-12 02:11 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-12 12:27 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-12 12:38 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-12 20:54 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-12 13:51 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-13 14:18 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-08 05:44 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-08 11:58 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-08 11:27 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-08 16:34 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-08 16:39 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-08 17:44 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-10 00:07 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-09 16:53 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-10 01:20 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-09 17:47 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-09 17:51 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-10 15:15 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-10 17:58 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-11 01:02 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-11 10:52 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-12 00:47 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-12 12:00 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-12 12:39 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-12 12:39 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-13 00:46 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-13 15:02 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-13 15:12 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-09-13 23:01 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-10 13:05 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-09 09:47 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-09 18:27 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-08 16:40 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-08 20:09 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-08 11:18 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-08 17:22 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-08 19:01 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-08 18:39 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-08 12:19 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-09-08 11:50 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-06 04:53 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-09-06 14:48 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-09 17:57 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-29 14:26 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-29 23:53 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-30 00:08 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-30 13:28 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-08-30 17:36 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-30 14:37 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-31 02:18 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-31 02:11 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-30 06:40 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-29 23:43 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-26 12:30 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-26 21:41 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-27 14:18 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 12:22 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 12:50 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-28 00:15 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 17:46 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-09-01 07:07 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-27 18:19 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-08-28 15:47 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-28 08:18 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-26 21:40 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-26 05:40 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-25 17:59 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-25 19:28 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-25 20:12 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-25 19:24 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-26 03:43 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-27 01:33 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-27 00:47 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 07:09 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-27 09:37 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 10:36 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-27 11:32 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 11:47 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-27 14:51 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 15:14 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-27 20:54 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 07:02 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-28 11:26 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 11:30 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 11:49 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-28 13:43 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 13:02 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-28 15:06 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 14:40 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-30 09:37 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-28 13:49 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-28 14:25 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-08 21:34 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-09 11:34 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-09 14:36 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-09 17:11 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-09 23:58 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-10 11:20 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> - 2024-09-13 02:16 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-13 16:25 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-13 18:05 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-09-13 17:32 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-28 13:55 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-27 21:13 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-08-27 21:07 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 07:03 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-28 14:01 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 12:39 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-28 18:48 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-25 22:00 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-26 05:39 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-26 17:16 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 07:10 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-27 05:17 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 07:23 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-27 06:47 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 08:58 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-27 23:44 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 06:59 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-28 05:39 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 08:04 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-30 03:21 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-30 10:43 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-31 00:01 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-31 06:44 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-31 22:30 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-08-30 14:38 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-31 00:02 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-09-01 15:19 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-09-01 15:22 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-09-01 23:48 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 08:09 -0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 13:32 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 08:47 -0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 14:58 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 10:35 -0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 15:45 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 10:52 -0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 11:04 -0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 16:18 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-28 16:51 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 18:58 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 16:55 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 14:02 -0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 19:13 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-28 19:29 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 19:33 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-27 15:06 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-27 12:49 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-27 12:44 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-27 23:50 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-28 06:31 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-25 18:28 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-26 05:38 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-25 18:23 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-25 17:58 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-25 18:51 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-25 18:36 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-25 20:11 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-25 17:48 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-26 10:54 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-26 17:55 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-27 12:33 +0300
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-27 19:38 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-08-27 09:45 -0400
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-31 03:56 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-26 15:46 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-27 04:36 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-27 09:44 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 12:16 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-27 21:53 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-27 23:55 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-27 23:53 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-28 01:28 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-28 05:45 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 09:49 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-08-26 15:13 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-26 18:16 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-28 19:57 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-08-28 18:37 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-28 23:18 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-08-28 22:11 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-28 13:42 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-28 23:22 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-08-28 22:36 -0700
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-27 04:34 +0000
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-27 11:11 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-27 21:20 +0100
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-08-31 10:14 +0200
Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-26 02:33 +0000
Page 12 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 … 21 Next page →
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-18 07:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vcedeq$1qoq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388444 |
On 9/18/24 04:05, David Brown wrote: ... > Perhaps we have milked this comparison enough - it's not really good > c.l.c. topicality. ... My purpose in starting this sub-thread was to deny the validity of the comparison of this newsgroup to a Bible study group. Topicality was out the window from that point onward.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-18 14:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vceg89$277g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388448 |
On 18/09/2024 13:27, James Kuyper wrote: > On 9/18/24 04:05, David Brown wrote: > ... >> Perhaps we have milked this comparison enough - it's not really good >> c.l.c. topicality. ... > > My purpose in starting this sub-thread was to deny the validity of the > comparison of this newsgroup to a Bible study group. Topicality was out > the window from that point onward. > Sure. And I think it was a valid point. I just know that /I/ easily stray further off-topic with some subjects, such as this one. (Lead me not into temptation - I can find the way myself :-) )
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-16 19:26 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vc9por$2vfam$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388417 |
On 16.09.2024 18:19, James Kuyper wrote:
> On 2024-09-16, Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>> On 16/09/2024 12:30, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> ...
>>> Yes; "I hsve my own personal version of the Bible in which many of its
>>> arbitrary stories are otherwise" is probably not a good way to approach
>>> a Bible study group.
>>
>> So this is a Bible study group now?
>
> No, but there are some key similarities. Both bible study groups and
> this newsgroup have an authoritative text to reference. However, the
> nature of that authority is quite different in the two cases. Bible
> study groups believe that the Bible is divinely inspired. Those who are
> sufficiently familiar with the C standard know that it was created by a
> committee of experts, fully capable of making mistakes. Many (most?)
> Believers consider the Bible to be incapable of being wrong.
But wasn't the Bible created in a ("Chinese whispers"?) way like
([God] ->) human -> ... -> human -> Bible write-down
with (a lot?) of ([possibly] errant) humans in between?
Disclaimer: I don't know how many instances of "human" were involved.
Only that there's no way, I suppose, to fix any (even obvious) mistakes
in the Bible.
Janis
> [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-17 09:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vcc04t$3hdhu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388419 |
On 9/16/24 13:26, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> On 16.09.2024 18:19, James Kuyper wrote:
>> On 2024-09-16, Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>> On 16/09/2024 12:30, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>> ...
>>>> Yes; "I hsve my own personal version of the Bible in which many of its
>>>> arbitrary stories are otherwise" is probably not a good way to approach
>>>> a Bible study group.
>>>
>>> So this is a Bible study group now?
>>
>> No, but there are some key similarities. Both bible study groups and
>> this newsgroup have an authoritative text to reference. However, the
>> nature of that authority is quite different in the two cases. Bible
>> study groups believe that the Bible is divinely inspired. Those who are
>> sufficiently familiar with the C standard know that it was created by a
>> committee of experts, fully capable of making mistakes. Many (most?)
>> Believers consider the Bible to be incapable of being wrong.
>
> But wasn't the Bible created in a ("Chinese whispers"?) way like
> ([God] ->) human -> ... -> human -> Bible write-down
> with (a lot?) of ([possibly] errant) humans in between?
>
> Disclaimer: I don't know how many instances of "human" were involved.
As I understand it, the claim is that God directly inspired the final
authors. They might have received incorrect information by other means,
but God would have inspired them to correct it in the version that got
committed to paper.
I've even heard the same claim made for those who merely translated the
text to a new language, rather than writing it for the first time. In
particular, I remember that claim being made for both the Septuagint and
the King James bible.
Serious Bible scholars know all about the many variant texts and
inaccurate translations - but those scholars are not the ones making the
claims I'm talking about. Also, not all Believers believe that all
divinely inspired texts are perfect - many believe that every biblical
text is, at best, somewhat distorted due to the divine inspiration being
modified during the process of passing through a human brain.
I'm an atheist talking about what Believers think - no disrespect is
intended
beyond that inherent in the fact that I am an atheist.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-12 02:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vbtik7$38tme$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #388257 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
> On 10/09/2024 15:24, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>> I don't know if you were deliberately twisting the term because you are
>> now 100% committed to some false symmetry in assignments, or whether you
>> are just very loose in your use of terms, but rvalue expressions (C does
>> not really use the term, but it's better than non-lvalue expressions)
>> can't have "references" to them. That was all that Waldek Hebisch was
>> saying. Did you think for a second that he did not know that if you put
>> an int value into an object you can take the pointer to that object?
>
> He took the symmetry I was claiming for assignment, and created an
> asymmetric counter-example where the dereferencing part of the LHS was
> moved into a function, necessitating the creation of a discrete
> reference for the LHS.
>
> I created a counter-counter-example where dereferences on both sides
> were moved into the function, so restoring the symmetry.
Really not. My point was about conceptual model and important
part is to keep such model simple. You used complex language
construct which defeats the purose of conceptual model.
> And yes I'm still committed to that symmetry. I'ved used it for
> countless language implementations. C is little different other than it
> has a 700-page standard that suggests a recommended model of how it's
> supposed to work.
>
> You can't really use that to bash me about the head with and maintain
> that all my ideas about language implementation are wrong because C
> views assignment in its own idiosyncratic manner.
Well, gcc implements assignment in similar way to you (or at least
did that in the past, I have not checked if recent version do the
same). To be more precise, gcc parser when seeing a variable
creates read reference to this variable. When parser realizes that
already recognized part of expression is the left hand side of an
assignment it converts it to write access. So your approach is
no worse than gcc. But it creates troubles, process of changing
subexpression with read references into write access is more
complicated than replacing read instruction by write instruction.
One, they need to recognize things which are invalid. Second,
from the very beginning gcc transforms its intermediate representation.
But some transforms valid on right hand side are invalid on the
left hand side, so gcc needs to postpone them and do later.
Third, intermdiate form contains extra information and that
needs to be handled later.
So your (and gcc) approach is: "let us pretend that assigment
operator is symmetric and fix asymetry (that is left hand side)
later". That works, and I can imagine good reasons to proceed
that way. Or intead of "fixing" one can first generate intemediate
for and then pass right hand side to "right hand side code
generator" and left hand side to "left hand side code generator".
One way or another, in this approach left hand side of assigment
must be handled differently than right hand side. But saying that
assignment operator is really symmetric is wrong. Different
treatement treatment of sizes shows this. And once you accept
that assignment operator is asymetric, then in Bliss you can handle
both sides in exactly the same way. In C, there is implict
lvalue convertion and at tops of arguments to assigment there
is slight asymetry, you do not apply lvalue convertion to the
left hand argument, but apply it to the right argument. This
is simpler model then yours when you want precise destription.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-12 12:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vbuj67$733i$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388295 |
On 12/09/2024 03:11, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>> On 10/09/2024 15:24, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>> I don't know if you were deliberately twisting the term because you are
>>> now 100% committed to some false symmetry in assignments, or whether you
>>> are just very loose in your use of terms, but rvalue expressions (C does
>>> not really use the term, but it's better than non-lvalue expressions)
>>> can't have "references" to them. That was all that Waldek Hebisch was
>>> saying. Did you think for a second that he did not know that if you put
>>> an int value into an object you can take the pointer to that object?
>>
>> He took the symmetry I was claiming for assignment, and created an
>> asymmetric counter-example where the dereferencing part of the LHS was
>> moved into a function, necessitating the creation of a discrete
>> reference for the LHS.
>>
>> I created a counter-counter-example where dereferences on both sides
>> were moved into the function, so restoring the symmetry.
>
> Really not. My point was about conceptual model and important
> part is to keep such model simple. You used complex language
> construct which defeats the purose of conceptual model.
I've seen countless proposals in the Reddit PL forum with people trying
to turn everything into a function (but it is very FP oriented anyway).
To my mind that makes a language much more complicated. You can't really
implement 'if' and 'while' statements via functions without closures for
example.
So I'd prefer to keep assignment as low-tech as possible.
>> And yes I'm still committed to that symmetry. I'ved used it for
>> countless language implementations. C is little different other than it
>> has a 700-page standard that suggests a recommended model of how it's
>> supposed to work.
>>
>> You can't really use that to bash me about the head with and maintain
>> that all my ideas about language implementation are wrong because C
>> views assignment in its own idiosyncratic manner.
>
> Well, gcc implements assignment in similar way to you (or at least
> did that in the past, I have not checked if recent version do the
> same). To be more precise, gcc parser when seeing a variable
> creates read reference to this variable. When parser realizes that
> already recognized part of expression is the left hand side of an
> assignment it converts it to write access. So your approach is
> no worse than gcc. But it creates troubles, process of changing
> subexpression with read references into write access is more
> complicated than replacing read instruction by write instruction.
> One, they need to recognize things which are invalid.
It's not that complicated, not with C anyway.
Because in C, if you take the 3-4 categories of LHS in assignments
(ignore the esoteric ones, and [] and . are really the same), there is
only one top-level lvalue node to consider.
That's the only thing that needs to 'change', which I don't think is
onerous anyway.
With more elaborate LHSs, for example like this:
(A[i], B[i], (x ? C.m : D.m) = Y();
There can be both multiple and nested lvalue nodes. So 'lvalueness' has
to somehow propagate down into those branches after parsing has been done.
And yet, I was doing that in the 1980s on my toy compilers. So that's
not that hard either.
(Now, try implementing this assignment with a function!)
> Second,
> from the very beginning gcc transforms its intermediate representation.
> But some transforms valid on right hand side are invalid on the
> left hand side, so gcc needs to postpone them and do later.
> Third, intermdiate form contains extra information and that
> needs to be handled later.
>
> So your (and gcc) approach is: "let us pretend that assigment
> operator is symmetric and fix asymetry (that is left hand side)
> later". That works, and I can imagine good reasons to proceed
> that way. Or intead of "fixing" one can first generate intemediate
> for and then pass right hand side to "right hand side code
> generator" and left hand side to "left hand side code generator".
> One way or another, in this approach left hand side of assigment
> must be handled differently than right hand side. But saying that
> assignment operator is really symmetric is wrong. Different
> treatement treatment of sizes shows this. And once you accept
> that assignment operator is asymetric, then in Bliss you can handle
> both sides in exactly the same way. In C, there is implict
> lvalue convertion
What exactly /is/ lvalue conversion? What is converted to what?
I do an lvalue /check/ (so variable 'A' yes, const 6, no). But nothing
is actually converted.
What /sometimes/ happens in elaborate cases, is that & is applied to
multiple terms, balanced by a single * elsewhere. But that is not a
conversion, and is usually not needed for C which only has a single
lvalue node on the LHS.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-12 12:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87ikv0y864.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #388303 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> It's not that complicated, not with C anyway.
>
> Because in C, if you take the 3-4 categories of LHS in assignments
> (ignore the esoteric ones, and [] and . are really the same), there is
> only one top-level lvalue node to consider.
I agree, there's only one thing to consider. The LHS of an
assignment is a modifiable lvalue.
We've spent a lot of time arguing about how any "categories" there
are for the LHS of an assignment. If I recall correctly, the whole
thing started when you stated that "the LHS of an assignment is
one of four categories", leading to a debate about whether four
is the correct number.
Enumerating the kinds of expressions that can be modifiable
lvalues is interesting, I suppose, but are A and (A) in different
"categories"? Is it important to count generic selections and
compound literals?
Who cares, and why?
> That's the only thing that needs to 'change', which I don't think is
> onerous anyway.
I don't know what you're saying needs to change.
> With more elaborate LHSs, for example like this:
>
> (A[i], B[i], (x ? C.m : D.m) = Y();
>
> There can be both multiple and nested lvalue nodes. So 'lvalueness'
> has to somehow propagate down into those branches after parsing has
> been done.
>
> And yet, I was doing that in the 1980s on my toy compilers. So that's
> not that hard either.
Ok, it's not that hard to implement things that are not valid C.
Are you suggesting that anything that's easy to implement should
be added to the language standard? It's not that simple. Most of
the time, I'm more interested in discussing what's actually in C
than what could be added. And ease of implementation is only one
thing to consider when adding a new feature, and probably not the
most important.
[...]
> What exactly /is/ lvalue conversion? What is converted to what?
This is specified in the C standard (6.3.2.1p2 in C11, 6.3.3.1p2
in C23 drafts). I suggest you read it.
An lvalue (an expression that designates an object) is converted
to the value stored in the designated object. This conversion
(adjustment) does not occur on the LHS of an assignment or in
several other contexts.
It might have been clearer to say that the expression is adjusted
from an expression that designates an object (an lvalue) to an
expression that yields the value of that object (not an lvalue)
Note that this is not a run-time conversion, like a conversion of an
integer value to a floating-point value. The standard uses the word
"conversion" to refer both to run-time operations that take a value
of one type and yield a value of another type, and to compile-time
adjustments that change the way an expression is handled.
Array-to-pointer conversion is another example of the latter.
[...]
--
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 | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-12 20:54 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vbvgud$cspe$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388343 |
On 12/09/2024 20:38, Keith Thompson wrote: > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > [...] >> It's not that complicated, not with C anyway. >> >> Because in C, if you take the 3-4 categories of LHS in assignments >> (ignore the esoteric ones, and [] and . are really the same), there is >> only one top-level lvalue node to consider. > > I agree, there's only one thing to consider. The LHS of an > assignment is a modifiable lvalue. > > We've spent a lot of time arguing about how any "categories" there > are for the LHS of an assignment. If I recall correctly, the whole > thing started when you stated that "the LHS of an assignment is > one of four categories", leading to a debate about whether four > is the correct number. > > Enumerating the kinds of expressions that can be modifiable > lvalues is interesting, I suppose, but are A and (A) in different > "categories"? Is it important to count generic selections and > compound literals? > > Who cares, and why? If you go back far enough, someone was questioning the use of a 2-way selection (what in C would be expressed using ?:) on the left of an assignment, in an example from another language. So my set of categories were in the context of what /was/ allowed in C on the left of an assignment. People made too much of it. >> And yet, I was doing that in the 1980s on my toy compilers. So that's >> not that hard either. > > Ok, it's not that hard to implement things that are not valid C. And my comments were in reply to this from WH: > But it creates troubles, process of changing > subexpression with read references into write access is more > complicated than replacing read instruction by write instruction. > One, they need to recognize things which are invalid. This suggests a complexity that does not really exist, certainly not for C with its simple LHSs, and I said that it's not that hard even with more elaborate languages. So your reply is taking my remark of contest. Or were you just trying to write something clever? According to that, any entire language X would be easy to implement because it's not valid C? >> What exactly /is/ lvalue conversion? What is converted to what? > > This is specified in the C standard (6.3.2.1p2 in C11, 6.3.3.1p2 > in C23 drafts). I suggest you read it. > > An lvalue (an expression that designates an object) is converted > to the value stored in the designated object. This conversion > (adjustment) does not occur on the LHS of an assignment or in > several other contexts. > > It might have been clearer to say that the expression is adjusted > from an expression that designates an object (an lvalue) to an > expression that yields the value of that object (not an lvalue) > > Note that this is not a run-time conversion, Well quite. WH was trying to make it out it's a big deal, but it's usually a no-op (ie. nothing needs to be done in an actual compiler). > like a conversion of an > integer value to a floating-point value. No, there an actual conversion is needed, usually. (Maybe the implementation language only stores numeric constants as floats, so only the type tag changes.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-12 13:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <875xr0y4re.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #388347 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 12/09/2024 20:38, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>> [...]
>>> It's not that complicated, not with C anyway.
>>>
>>> Because in C, if you take the 3-4 categories of LHS in assignments
>>> (ignore the esoteric ones, and [] and . are really the same), there is
>>> only one top-level lvalue node to consider.
>> I agree, there's only one thing to consider. The LHS of an
>> assignment is a modifiable lvalue.
>> We've spent a lot of time arguing about how any "categories" there
>> are for the LHS of an assignment. If I recall correctly, the whole
>> thing started when you stated that "the LHS of an assignment is
>> one of four categories", leading to a debate about whether four
>> is the correct number.
>> Enumerating the kinds of expressions that can be modifiable
>> lvalues is interesting, I suppose, but are A and (A) in different
>> "categories"? Is it important to count generic selections and
>> compound literals?
>> Who cares, and why?
>
> If you go back far enough, someone was questioning the use of a 2-way
> selection (what in C would be expressed using ?:) on the left of an
> assignment, in an example from another language.
Ok.
In C it's called a conditional expression, or informally a ternary
expression (because it happen to be the only operator that takes three
operands).
A conditional expression (more precisely, an expression whose top
level operator is ?:) is not an lvalue in C. It could have been,
and it is in C++ if the second and third operands are both lvalues.
I have no particular opinion about whether some future C should
support conditional expressions as lvalues. That's probably about
all that can be meaningfully said on the subject.
> So my set of categories were in the context of what /was/ allowed in C
> on the left of an assignment.
>
> People made too much of it.
Agreed. Let's stop doing that. (Your specific statement that there are
*four* categories triggered a lot of the "too much".)
>>> And yet, I was doing that in the 1980s on my toy compilers. So that's
>>> not that hard either.
>> Ok, it's not that hard to implement things that are not valid C.
>
> And my comments were in reply to this from WH:
>
>> But it creates troubles, process of changing
>> subexpression with read references into write access is more
>> complicated than replacing read instruction by write instruction.
>> One, they need to recognize things which are invalid.
>
> This suggests a complexity that does not really exist, certainly not
> for C with its simple LHSs, and I said that it's not that hard even
> with more elaborate languages.
>
> So your reply is taking my remark of contest. Or were you just trying
> to write something clever? According to that, any entire language X
> would be easy to implement because it's not valid C?
I did not mean to suggest that *all* things that are not valid C
are easy to implement. *Some* things that are not valid C would
be easy to implement in a C or C-like implementation.
I thought you might be suggesting that things that are easy to implement
should be added to C. Perhaps that's not what you meant.
Upthread, you wrote:
That's the only thing that needs to 'change', which I don't think is
onerous anyway.
Would you like to clarify what you think needs to change?
>>> What exactly /is/ lvalue conversion? What is converted to what?
>> This is specified in the C standard (6.3.2.1p2 in C11, 6.3.3.1p2
>> in C23 drafts). I suggest you read it.
>> An lvalue (an expression that designates an object) is converted
>> to the value stored in the designated object. This conversion
>> (adjustment) does not occur on the LHS of an assignment or in
>> several other contexts.
>> It might have been clearer to say that the expression is adjusted
>> from an expression that designates an object (an lvalue) to an
>> expression that yields the value of that object (not an lvalue)
>> Note that this is not a run-time conversion,
>
> Well quite. WH was trying to make it out it's a big deal, but it's
> usually a no-op (ie. nothing needs to be done in an actual compiler).
Nothing needs to be done??
An actual compiler has to recognize whether an expression that's
an lvalue designates an object or yields the value of the object.
But this is likely to get back to the discussion about whether
assignment is "symmetric", and I've already said I won't waste any
more time debating that.
[...]
--
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 | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-13 14:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vc1e3s$s2sa$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388348 |
On 12/09/2024 21:51, Keith Thompson wrote: > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >> On 12/09/2024 20:38, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >>> [...] >>>> It's not that complicated, not with C anyway. > Agreed. Let's stop doing that. (Your specific statement that there are > *four* categories triggered a lot of the "too much".) I actually said 3-4 categories, depending on when index operations get turned into pointer operations. In C source they don't, but it might conceptually be in the mind of whoever is writing the C source. > Upthread, you wrote: > > That's the only thing that needs to 'change', which I don't think is > onerous anyway. > > Would you like to clarify what you think needs to change? That was in reply to this (I've capitalised 'changing'): WH: >"To be more precise, gcc parser when seeing a variable creates read reference to this variable. When parser realizes that already recognized part of expression is the left hand side of an assignment it converts it to write access. So your approach is no worse than gcc. But it creates troubles, process of CHANGING subexpression with read references into write access is more complicated than replacing read instruction by write instruction." I put my 'change' in quotes since I didn't believe any such change is necessary. But if somebody or something deems it so then, in C, that would only apply to one lvalue on the LHS of an assignment. WH was criticising the approach of initially dealing with LHS/RHS, lvalue/rvalue, the same way, then making any 'changes' later. I gave an example of a LHS that might appear in some languages that had MULTIPLE lvalue terms on the left of an assignment, that could be nested within a complex expression, where that appoach gives very little trouble. But I can see you're mainly concerned with scanning my posts to see if there's any divergence from the exact wording of the C standard, even though the discussion is a little wider than that in crossing language boundaries, and includes implementation details that are beyond the scope of the standard anyway. All I can say is that comp.std.c is that way --->
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-08 05:44 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vbj6ii$1q6mh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388139 |
On 06.09.2024 13:34, Bart wrote:
>
> In more complicated cases in languages, then some asymmetry does come
> up. For example, suppose C allowed this (my language allows the
> equivalent):
>
> (c ? a : b) = x;
In Algol 68 you can write
IF c THEN a ELSE b FI := x
or, in a shorter form, as
( c | a | b ) := x
if you prefer.
>
> So this assigns to either a or b depending on c. My implementation
> effectively turns it into this:
>
> *(c ? &a : &b) = x;
>
> So using explicit references and derefs. However, that is internal. The
> symmetry still exists in the syntax:
>
> (c ? a : b) = (c ? a : b);
This is only a "visual" symmetry, not a semantical one.
The LHS of the Algol 68 example is of 'REF' (lvalue) type, as it would
be the case with a language that supports a syntax as you show it here.
I'm not sure if you should adjust your wording (concerning "symmetry")
given that you seem to widely inflict confusion here.
Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-08 11:58 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <20240908115827.00007521@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #388156 |
On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 05:44:16 +0200 Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: > On 06.09.2024 13:34, Bart wrote: > > > > In more complicated cases in languages, then some asymmetry does > > come up. For example, suppose C allowed this (my language allows the > > equivalent): > > > > (c ? a : b) = x; > > In Algol 68 you can write > > IF c THEN a ELSE b FI := x > > or, in a shorter form, as > > ( c | a | b ) := x > > if you prefer. > Are you sure? It seems to me that you got it backward.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-08 11:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vbju6l$1sqao$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388164 |
On 08/09/2024 09:58, Michael S wrote: > On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 05:44:16 +0200 > Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On 06.09.2024 13:34, Bart wrote: >>> >>> In more complicated cases in languages, then some asymmetry does >>> come up. For example, suppose C allowed this (my language allows the >>> equivalent): >>> >>> (c ? a : b) = x; >> >> In Algol 68 you can write >> >> IF c THEN a ELSE b FI := x >> >> or, in a shorter form, as >> >> ( c | a | b ) := x >> >> if you prefer. >> > > Are you sure? > It seems to me that you got it backward. > The point here is that you can write such a 2-way select on the LHS of an assignment. C doesn't allow that unless you wrap it up as a pointer expression: *(c ? &a : &b) = x; In language like C, the LHS of an assignment is one of four categories: A = Y; // name *X = Y; // pointer X[i] = Y; // index X.m = Y; // member select A is a simple variable; X represents a term of any complexity, and Y is any expression. (In C, the middle two are really the same thing.) Some languages allow extra things on the LHS, but in C they can be emulated by transforming the term to a pointer operation. In the same it can emulate pass-by-reference (which objects which are not arrays!)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-08 16:34 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <20240908163432.00003f8f@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #388166 |
On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 11:27:33 +0100 Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > On 08/09/2024 09:58, Michael S wrote: > > On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 05:44:16 +0200 > > Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 06.09.2024 13:34, Bart wrote: > >>> > >>> In more complicated cases in languages, then some asymmetry does > >>> come up. For example, suppose C allowed this (my language allows > >>> the equivalent): > >>> > >>> (c ? a : b) = x; > >> > >> In Algol 68 you can write > >> > >> IF c THEN a ELSE b FI := x > >> > >> or, in a shorter form, as > >> > >> ( c | a | b ) := x > >> > >> if you prefer. > >> > > > > Are you sure? > > It seems to me that you got it backward. > > > > The point here is that you can write such a 2-way select on the LHS > of an assignment. C doesn't allow that unless you wrap it up as a > pointer expression: > > *(c ? &a : &b) = x; > > In language like C, the LHS of an assignment is one of four > categories: > > A = Y; // name > *X = Y; // pointer > X[i] = Y; // index > X.m = Y; // member select > > A is a simple variable; X represents a term of any complexity, and Y > is any expression. (In C, the middle two are really the same thing.) > > Some languages allow extra things on the LHS, but in C they can be > emulated by transforming the term to a pointer operation. In the same > it can emulate pass-by-reference (which objects which are not arrays!) Got it. Thank you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-08 16:39 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87zfoikve1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #388166 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > In language like C, the LHS of an assignment is one of four categories: > > A = Y; // name > *X = Y; // pointer > X[i] = Y; // index > X.m = Y; // member select I can think of three others. There may be more. > A is a simple variable; C does not define the term "simple variable" so presumably you define it to be any named object that /can/ appear on the LHS of a simple assignment -- a sort of "no true Scots-variable". > X represents a term of any complexity, and Y is any > expression. I can think of at least one expression form for X that contradicts this claim. It would be great if C had simple rules, but it doesn't. You could have started by saying something about the most comment forms of assignment being those you list, and that X can be almost any term, but the risk of making absolute claims is that people (like me) will look into them. > (In C, the middle two are really the same thing.) -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-08 17:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vbkka9$201ms$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388173 |
On 08/09/2024 16:39, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > >> In language like C, the LHS of an assignment is one of four categories: >> >> A = Y; // name >> *X = Y; // pointer >> X[i] = Y; // index >> X.m = Y; // member select > > I can think of three others. There may be more. OK, so what are they? > >> A is a simple variable; > > C does not define the term "simple variable" so presumably you define it > to be any named object that /can/ appear on the LHS of a simple > assignment -- a sort of "no true Scots-variable". > >> X represents a term of any complexity, and Y is any >> expression. > > I can think of at least one expression form for X that contradicts this > claim. Example? (You seem to be turning into Tim here by hinting at things but withholding any further information.) > It would be great if C had simple rules, but it doesn't. You could have > started by saying something about the most comment forms of assignment > being those you list, and that X can be almost any term, but the risk of > making absolute claims is that people (like me) will look into them. This was a reply to someone who was questioning whether those examples of a complex LHS for Algol68 were valid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-10 00:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vbnv43$2igdn$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388176 |
On 08/09/2024 17:44, Bart wrote: > On 08/09/2024 16:39, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >> >>> In language like C, the LHS of an assignment is one of four categories: >>> >>> A = Y; // name >>> *X = Y; // pointer >>> X[i] = Y; // index >>> X.m = Y; // member select >> >> I can think of three others. There may be more. > > OK, so what are they? TM: >Yes, very good. I count four or five, depending on what differences count as different. I guess nobody is going to say what those extra categories are, are they? It's bad form to call somebody out on something but then refuse to tell them exactly what they've got wrong or have missed out. 3, 4, or maybe 5 mysterious categories of LHS assignment terms that I have never been encountered in a million lines of C code I've processed, but nobody is willing to say what they are? I sense a wind-up. >> I can think of at least one expression form for X that contradicts this >> claim. > > Example? Nothing here either.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-09 16:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87mskg1j13.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #388230 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 08/09/2024 17:44, Bart wrote:
>> On 08/09/2024 16:39, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> In language like C, the LHS of an assignment is one of four categories:
>>>>
>>>> A = Y; // name
>>>> *X = Y; // pointer
>>>> X[i] = Y; // index
>>>> X.m = Y; // member select
>>>
>>> I can think of three others. There may be more.
>> OK, so what are they?
>
> TM:
>>Yes, very good. I count four or five, depending on what
> differences count as different.
>
> I guess nobody is going to say what those extra categories are, are they?
The LHS of an assignment must be a modifiable lvalue. Searching for the
word "lvalue" in the standard's section on expressions yields several
forms not listed above:
- A parenthesized lvalue:
(A) = Y;
- A generic selection whose result expression is an lvalue:
_Generic(0, int: A) = Y;
Not sure why you'd do this.
- X->m, where X is a pointer (you might think of that as the same
category as X.m, but the standard doesn't define the -> operator in
terms of the . operator)
- A compound literal:
int n;
(int){n} = 42;
This assigns a value to a temporary object which is immediately
discarded. I can't think of a valid use for this.
[...]
--
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 | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-10 01:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vbo3bn$2igdn$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #388232 |
On 10/09/2024 00:53, Keith Thompson wrote:
> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>> On 08/09/2024 17:44, Bart wrote:
>>> On 08/09/2024 16:39, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> In language like C, the LHS of an assignment is one of four categories:
>>>>>
>>>>> A = Y; // name
>>>>> *X = Y; // pointer
>>>>> X[i] = Y; // index
>>>>> X.m = Y; // member select
>>>>
>>>> I can think of three others. There may be more.
>>> OK, so what are they?
>>
>> TM:
>>> Yes, very good. I count four or five, depending on what
>> differences count as different.
>>
>> I guess nobody is going to say what those extra categories are, are they?
>
> The LHS of an assignment must be a modifiable lvalue. Searching for the
> word "lvalue" in the standard's section on expressions yields several
> forms not listed above:
>
> - A parenthesized lvalue:
> (A) = Y;
>
> - A generic selection whose result expression is an lvalue:
> _Generic(0, int: A) = Y;
> Not sure why you'd do this.
>
> - X->m, where X is a pointer (you might think of that as the same
> category as X.m, but the standard doesn't define the -> operator in
> terms of the . operator)
>
> - A compound literal:
> int n;
> (int){n} = 42;
>
> This assigns a value to a temporary object which is immediately
> discarded. I can't think of a valid use for this.
>
OK, thanks for the prompt response.
You listed 4 examples; the 4th one I had no idea about (I don't support
compound literals anyway).
The first 3, I have doubts as to whether they warrant their own categories.
The first two just end up doing an assignment to A (parentheses are
no-ops in terms like these anyway).
While the X->m term is exactly equivalent to (*X).m. I put these three
through my compiler and they produced the same AST as A = Y or *(X).m.
So I might call them curiosities rather than practical categories that
offer new possibilities.
For example, one of mine (I have several more actual ones) is multiple
assignment: (a, b) = (c, d).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-09 17:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87ikv41gi5.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #388234 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> So I might call them curiosities rather than practical categories that
> offer new possibilities.
I don't recall anyone saying that they would "offer new possibilities".
--
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]
Page 12 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web