Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #383248 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-03-02 17:13 -0600 |
| Last post | 2024-03-12 16:00 -0300 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 237 — 35 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
"White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2024-03-02 17:13 -0600
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-03 00:05 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-03 13:42 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" John McCue <jmccue@neutron.jmcunx.com> - 2024-03-03 02:10 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-03 02:23 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-03-03 11:11 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-03 03:30 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-03 08:54 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-03 20:11 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-03 13:49 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-03 22:11 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-03 23:27 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-07 06:46 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-03 08:52 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-03 11:10 +0200
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-03 12:01 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-03-03 16:03 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-03 18:18 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-03 21:23 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-03 14:01 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-04 09:44 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 11:38 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 12:46 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 12:36 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 12:41 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-05 10:01 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 12:51 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-06 11:43 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 14:18 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-08 13:23 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-09 13:25 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-09 14:16 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-09 14:18 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-03 23:31 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-03-04 17:05 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-04 18:24 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-03-05 02:46 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-05 11:23 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-03 20:10 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-03 14:06 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-03 23:29 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-03 15:53 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-03-04 01:00 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 11:44 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-04 21:07 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-05 00:59 +0200
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-05 01:54 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 22:18 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-05 07:06 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 23:10 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-05 11:11 +0200
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-05 22:58 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-06 14:02 +0200
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-03-06 12:28 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-07 00:00 +0200
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-07 11:35 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-07 13:44 +0200
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-07 16:36 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-07 17:18 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-03-08 14:41 +0200
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-08 15:07 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-03-08 15:15 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-08 17:55 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-03-08 10:08 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-04-29 00:05 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-04-28 17:14 -0700
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-04-29 01:58 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-04-28 19:01 -0700
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-04-29 04:28 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-04-29 13:40 -0700
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" paavo512 <paavo@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-04-29 12:45 +0300
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-04-29 13:42 -0700
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-30 16:46 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-07 16:35 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-08 08:25 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-08 12:57 +0200
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-08 15:32 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-08 16:57 +0200
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-04-29 00:02 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" aph@littlepinkcloud.invalid - 2024-04-29 08:55 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-07 01:45 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" aph@littlepinkcloud.invalid - 2024-03-06 14:30 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-07 01:46 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 18:00 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-07 02:37 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 20:36 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-07 01:44 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-03-14 15:39 -0700
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-03-04 00:44 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 12:57 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-03 13:48 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-03 15:31 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 00:09 -0600
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-05 07:07 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-05 14:56 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-03 22:14 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-03 14:15 -0800
[OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-03-04 16:39 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-04 17:21 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-07 06:48 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 23:01 -0800
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-07 08:15 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-07 08:23 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-03-07 10:20 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-09 06:23 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-09 06:21 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-07 14:34 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-07 07:58 -0800
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-03-07 18:09 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-03-07 14:39 -0500
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-03-07 11:23 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-09 06:27 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-08 23:27 -0800
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-09 12:21 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-03-09 15:02 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-09 23:11 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2024-03-21 14:47 +0300
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-03-09 10:40 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-03-09 11:56 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-03-10 14:03 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-03-10 19:07 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-09 12:25 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-03-09 13:11 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-09 23:13 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-03-10 00:13 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-10 10:17 +0200
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-10 13:35 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-10 17:15 +0000
avoiding strdup() (was: Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig.) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-03-09 13:19 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2024-03-09 15:25 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-09 16:37 -0800
Re: avoiding strdup() Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-10 10:11 +0200
Re: avoiding strdup() Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-10 13:38 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-10 17:12 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-10 18:47 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-03-10 19:20 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-03-11 16:23 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-11 18:50 +0200
Re: avoiding strdup() scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-11 17:05 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-11 19:35 +0200
Re: avoiding strdup() scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-11 18:06 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-11 20:29 +0200
Re: avoiding strdup() Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2024-03-11 19:57 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-11 10:13 -0700
Re: avoiding strdup() Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-11 17:58 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-11 11:28 -0700
Re: avoiding strdup() scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-11 17:58 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-11 11:30 -0700
Re: avoiding strdup() Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2024-03-11 19:45 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-11 13:11 -0700
Re: avoiding strdup() scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-11 17:00 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-11 17:52 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-11 18:10 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-03-11 19:11 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-11 12:34 -0700
Re: avoiding strdup() Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-03-12 01:12 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-11 18:20 -0700
Re: avoiding strdup() Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-03-12 15:40 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-12 15:31 -0700
Re: avoiding strdup() Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-03-13 09:50 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-12 15:55 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-03-12 22:44 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-12 23:50 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-03-13 03:46 -0400
Re: avoiding strdup() David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-13 16:08 +0100
Re: avoiding strdup() Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-04-29 00:53 +0000
Re: avoiding strdup() i@fuzy.me - 2024-04-29 22:38 +0800
Re: avoiding strdup() steve <sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2024-04-30 23:36 -0400
Re: avoiding strdup() Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-03-10 10:02 +0000
Re: [OT] UTF-8 sig. Was: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> - 2024-03-07 17:52 +0042
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 00:02 -0600
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> - 2024-03-03 23:59 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-03 16:06 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-04 05:43 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 13:15 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-04 21:26 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 13:28 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 13:29 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 02:46 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 19:40 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-05 04:43 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 21:23 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-05 07:07 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 13:48 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-06 00:25 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 22:01 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-07 23:42 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-07 16:21 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-03-05 03:32 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 19:42 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 00:03 -0600
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-05 07:08 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-05 11:27 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 13:01 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-05 21:24 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 13:44 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 14:11 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 14:34 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-06 14:31 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-03-06 13:50 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-06 16:18 +0200
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-03-06 14:38 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-03-06 19:46 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-06 19:50 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-03-06 14:14 -0500
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-03-06 19:50 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-06 21:13 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-03-08 21:36 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-12 00:07 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-03-11 20:05 -0700
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-03-06 19:27 -0500
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-07 03:06 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-03-07 14:28 -0500
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-07 23:44 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 07:42 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 14:14 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 13:58 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 14:02 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-06 14:34 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 14:13 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-07 23:43 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-08 09:01 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-12 00:03 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 11:54 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-04 15:41 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-03-04 15:28 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 18:51 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-04 21:11 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-05 11:31 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-06 00:25 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-03-06 14:40 +0100
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Derek <derek-nospam@shape-of-code.com> - 2024-03-04 12:18 +0000
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-04 12:52 -0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-03-05 21:51 +0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 15:43 +0800
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-03-12 15:54 -0300
Re: "White House to Developers: Using C or C++ Invites Cybersecurity Risks" Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-03-12 16:00 -0300
Page 11 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 9 10 [11] 12 Next page →
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 16:18 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20240306161842.00001400@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #383415 |
On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 13:50:16 +0000 bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > On 06/03/2024 13:31, David Brown wrote: > > On 05/03/2024 23:34, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > >> On 3/5/2024 2:11 PM, Keith Thompson wrote: > >>> "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> writes: > >>> [...] > >>>> ADA is bullet proof... Until its not... ;^) > >>> > >>> The language is called Ada, not ADA. > >> > >> I wonder how many people got confused? > >> > > > > Apparently you and Malcolm got confused. > > > > Others who mentioned the language know it is called "Ada". I not > > only corrected you, but gave an explanation of it, in the hope that > > with that clarity, you'd learn. > > > > Whoever wrote this short Wikipedia article on it got confused too as > it uses both Ada and ADA: > > https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_(programming_language) > > (The example program also includes 'Ada' as some package name. Since > it is case-insensitive, 'ADA' would also work.) > Your link is to "simple Wikipedia". I don't know what it is exactly, but it does not appear as authoritative as real Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_(programming_language) > Here's also a paper that uses 'ADA' (I assume it is the same > language): > > https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0166361582900136 > The article published 1982. The language became official in 1983. Possibly, in 1982 there still was a confusion w.r.t. its name. > Personally I'm not bothered whether anyone uses Ada or ADA. Is 'C' > written in all-caps or only capitalised? You can't tell! > If only ADA, written in upper case, was not widely used for something else...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 14:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <us9v51$fbe7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383416 |
On 06/03/2024 14:18, Michael S wrote: > On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 13:50:16 +0000 > bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> Whoever wrote this short Wikipedia article on it got confused too as >> it uses both Ada and ADA: >> >> https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_(programming_language) >> >> (The example program also includes 'Ada' as some package name. Since >> it is case-insensitive, 'ADA' would also work.) >> > > Your link is to "simple Wikipedia". I don't know what it is > exactly, but it does not appear as authoritative as real Wikipedia > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_(programming_language) > >> Here's also a paper that uses 'ADA' (I assume it is the same >> language): >> >> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0166361582900136 >> > > The article published 1982. The language became official in 1983. > Possibly, in 1982 there still was a confusion w.r.t. its name. It would have been know it was named after a person. (I think Lovelace would have been better though.) >> Personally I'm not bothered whether anyone uses Ada or ADA. Is 'C' >> written in all-caps or only capitalised? You can't tell! >> > > If only ADA, written in upper case, was not widely used for something > else... I don't know what that is without looking it up. In a programming newsgroup I expect ADA to be the language. BTW it's a good thing that C, written in upper case, can never be confused with anything else...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 19:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <usah79$jads$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383418 |
On 06/03/2024 14:38, bart wrote: > On 06/03/2024 14:18, Michael S wrote: >> If only ADA, written in upper case, was not widely used for something >> else... > > I don't know what that is without looking it up. In a programming > newsgroup I expect ADA to be the language. Here's an interesting pic: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/AdaLovelaceplaque.JPG Notice the upper-case name.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 19:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <YN3GN.38897$hN14.19245@fx17.iad> |
| In reply to | #383421 |
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >On 06/03/2024 14:38, bart wrote: >> On 06/03/2024 14:18, Michael S wrote: > >>> If only ADA, written in upper case, was not widely used for something >>> else... >> >> I don't know what that is without looking it up. In a programming >> newsgroup I expect ADA to be the language. > >Here's an interesting pic: > >https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/AdaLovelaceplaque.JPG > >Notice the upper-case name. Given that the entire name is in all uppercase, and it's not referring to the computer language, what is your point, if any?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 14:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <usafb2$irvm$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383416 |
On 3/6/24 09:18, Michael S wrote: > On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 13:50:16 +0000 > bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: ... >> Whoever wrote this short Wikipedia article on it got confused too as >> it uses both Ada and ADA: >> >> https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_(programming_language) >> >> (The example program also includes 'Ada' as some package name. Since >> it is case-insensitive, 'ADA' would also work.) >> > > Your link is to "simple Wikipedia". I don't know what it is > exactly, but it does not appear as authoritative as real Wikipedia Notice that in your following link, "en" appears at the beginning to indicate the use of English. "simple" at the beginning of the above link serves the same purpose. "Simple English" is it's own language, closely related to standard English. Read the corresponding Wikipedia article for more details.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 19:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20240306114939.761@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #383420 |
On 2024-03-06, James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote: > On 3/6/24 09:18, Michael S wrote: >> On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 13:50:16 +0000 >> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > ... >>> Whoever wrote this short Wikipedia article on it got confused too as >>> it uses both Ada and ADA: >>> >>> https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_(programming_language) >>> >>> (The example program also includes 'Ada' as some package name. Since >>> it is case-insensitive, 'ADA' would also work.) >>> >> >> Your link is to "simple Wikipedia". I don't know what it is >> exactly, but it does not appear as authoritative as real Wikipedia > > Notice that in your following link, "en" appears at the beginning to > indicate the use of English. "simple" at the beginning of the above link > serves the same purpose. "Simple English" is it's own language, closely > related to standard English. Where is Simple English spoken? Is there some geographic area where native speakers concentrate? -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 21:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <usaipk$jjq3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383423 |
On 06/03/2024 20:50, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > On 2024-03-06, James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote: >> On 3/6/24 09:18, Michael S wrote: >>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 13:50:16 +0000 >>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> ... >>>> Whoever wrote this short Wikipedia article on it got confused too as >>>> it uses both Ada and ADA: >>>> >>>> https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_(programming_language) >>>> >>>> (The example program also includes 'Ada' as some package name. Since >>>> it is case-insensitive, 'ADA' would also work.) >>>> >>> >>> Your link is to "simple Wikipedia". I don't know what it is >>> exactly, but it does not appear as authoritative as real Wikipedia >> >> Notice that in your following link, "en" appears at the beginning to >> indicate the use of English. "simple" at the beginning of the above link >> serves the same purpose. "Simple English" is it's own language, closely >> related to standard English. > > Where is Simple English spoken? Is there some geographic area where > native speakers concentrate? > It is meant to be simpler text, written in simpler language. The target audience will include younger people, people with dyslexia or other reading difficulties, learners of English, people with lower levels of education, people with limited intelligence or learning impediments, or simply people whose eyes glaze over when faced with long texts on the main Wikipedia pages.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-08 21:36 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ha2dnVzbM9-naHb4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #383424 |
On 03/06/2024 12:13 PM, David Brown wrote: > On 06/03/2024 20:50, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> On 2024-03-06, James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote: >>> On 3/6/24 09:18, Michael S wrote: >>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 13:50:16 +0000 >>>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >>> ... >>>>> Whoever wrote this short Wikipedia article on it got confused too as >>>>> it uses both Ada and ADA: >>>>> >>>>> https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_(programming_language) >>>>> >>>>> (The example program also includes 'Ada' as some package name. Since >>>>> it is case-insensitive, 'ADA' would also work.) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Your link is to "simple Wikipedia". I don't know what it is >>>> exactly, but it does not appear as authoritative as real Wikipedia >>> >>> Notice that in your following link, "en" appears at the beginning to >>> indicate the use of English. "simple" at the beginning of the above link >>> serves the same purpose. "Simple English" is it's own language, closely >>> related to standard English. >> >> Where is Simple English spoken? Is there some geographic area where >> native speakers concentrate? >> > > It is meant to be simpler text, written in simpler language. The target > audience will include younger people, people with dyslexia or other > reading difficulties, learners of English, people with lower levels of > education, people with limited intelligence or learning impediments, or > simply people whose eyes glaze over when faced with long texts on the > main Wikipedia pages. > > Yet, why? There's "Simplified Technical English", which is a same sort of idea, with the idea that manuals and instructions be clear and unambiguous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_Technical_English Heh, it's like in the old days, when people would get manuals, and be amused as it were by the expression. What I'd like to know about is who keeps dialing the "harmonization" efforts, which really must give grouse to the "harmonisation" spellers, when good old-fashioned words "spelt" their own way, which of course is archaic "spelled". It reminds me of "Math Blaster" and "Typing Games", vis-a-vis, "the spelling bee", and for that matter, of course, weekly spelling quizzes all through elementary school. I'm so old the only games we had were how to compute and how to spell. And Tooth Invaders. Just kidding I had 50+ floppies for my Commodore64. Like GI Joe and Beachhead II. But we didn't get promoted in school if we didn't pass our spelling tests. (We couldn't even have dangling prepositions or sentence fragments like the above.) We had a class in school we couldn't even pass until we could type thirty words a minute. The Simplified Technical English though is a good idea, it's used in technical manuals and instructions, widely. Really, whever harmonization dials away a word, I'm like, hey, I'm using that word. There's something to be said for a, "source parser", the idea being a, multi-pass parser of sorts, with any number of, forms, so that it results, parsing languages sort of opportunistically, and results, sort of lifting, sections, of source, into regions of syntax, so that as syntaxes get all commingled, that all the syntax and grammar definitions get piled together, where it sort of results then for comments and quoting, and, usual ideas of brackets, and comma, for joiners and separators and groupers and splitters, observing mostly usually the parenthetical and indentation, for all sorts of languages, into, a pretty common sort of form. So, what is there, "Simplified Compilation Source", basically reflecting, "if it's source somehow it parses, if being ambiguous among languages then in editions of each or according to the source locale", these kinds of things.... For a long time I've been thinking about "modular and composable parsers", with mostly the usual goal of relating productions in grammar to source locations, that one figures it would be a most usual sort of study, to result, all the proliferation of little languages, get all parsed, then for the great facility of "term re-write rules" and "term-graph re-write rules", or "re-write systems", or for extracting signatures, identifiers, and logic, for any kind of language. I think everybody reading this has a most usual sort of exposure to the theory of parsing as after Backus-Naur format, vis-a-vis syntax diagrams or railroad diagrams, and Chomsky hierarchy, and lexers and parsers and the interpreted and all these kinds of things, but I don't know a sort of wide-open framework that parses any kinds of sources and happens to also re-write itself to any sort of target, parsing any source language in any source language. Did I miss the memo? What I got into was defining languages in terms of comments and quoting, and, brackets and commas, and, space and line, in terms of, sequence and alternation, for basically that all the source is loaded or mapped into memory, then instead of an abstract syntax tree or sorts, results an abstract syntax sequence of sorts, those "lifted" over the source text for its location, then that any sort of lexicalizing and syntax and grammar, all get put together as modules and any one just enumerates or makes equivalent whatever kind of source it is, then according to the language, results usual sorts constructs and productions, for functional and procedural languages, and data, and, you know, language. Tesniere, Tesniere is the great complement to Chomsky, where after Chomsky is like, "this finite state machine builds models of productions in minimal resources", to, something like, "Simplified Compilation Source", parser, "this algorithm works in fixed or linear resources in up to factorial time and parses anything, and unparsed sections are their source text, and iterating the data structure or any segment iterates the source under it that it's lifted over". See, look at that, "lifted over", I would get a bad mark for that. Of course that's since been relaxed, figuring it's natural to dangle and OK to continue. And so on. So anyways as long as we're talking about all the usual languages, uh, is that all "Common Source Language"? CS language? So, for something like, "Common Compilation Components", figuring all sorts usual functional and procedural productions sort of have a usual form and thusly can be a great fabric of re-write rules, or targetting, basically is for making common-enough productions and the algorithm be multi-pass as necessary, to result a usual sort of workbench for languages of the source.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-12 00:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <uso6br$3t3jn$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383480 |
On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 21:36:14 -0800, Ross Finlayson wrote: > What I'd like to know about is who keeps dialing the "harmonization" > efforts, which really must give grouse to the "harmonisation" > spellers ... Some words came from French and had “-ize”, others did not and had “-ise”. Some folks in Britain decided to change the former to the latter. “Televise”, “merchandise”, “advertise” -- never any “-ize” form. “Synchronize”, “harmonize”, “apologize” -- “-ize” originally.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-11 20:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <SD6dnWlgV-b2W3L4nZ2dnZfqnPhi4p2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #383531 |
On 03/11/2024 05:07 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 21:36:14 -0800, Ross Finlayson wrote: > >> What I'd like to know about is who keeps dialing the "harmonization" >> efforts, which really must give grouse to the "harmonisation" >> spellers ... > > Some words came from French and had “-ize”, others did not and had “-ise”. > Some folks in Britain decided to change the former to the latter. > > “Televise”, “merchandise”, “advertise” -- never any “-ize” form. > > “Synchronize”, “harmonize”, “apologize” -- “-ize” originally. > Hey thanks that's something I hadn't thought, that the harmonization was coming from this side of the pond besides vice-versa, with regards to that "harmonization" is an effort in controlled languages in terms of natural languages which are organic though of course subject their extended memory the written corpi, which I write corpi, not corpora. It's like when the dictionary adds new words, the old words are still words, in, the "Wortbuch", an abstract dictionary of all the words, that I read about in Curme. (I'm a fan of Tesniere and Curme.) About parsing and re-writing systems, I'm really wondering a lot about, compilation units, lines, spacing and indentation, blocks, comments, quoting, punctuation, identifiers, brackets, commas, and stops, how to write grammars for all sorts usual source language in those, and result, a novel sort of linear data structure above those, in whatever languages so recognized in those, and any sections it doesn't as the source text. I looked around a bit and after re-writing on the Wiki and "multi-pass parser" there are some sorts ideas, usually in terms of fungible intermediate languages for targeting those to whatever languages, here though mostly to deal with a gamut of existing code, there are lots of syntax recognizers and highlighters and this kind of thing, "auto-detect" in the static analysis toolkit, the languages, then as with regards to that a given compilation unit is only gonna be one or a few languages in it, with regards for example to "code in text" or "text in code", about comments, sections, blocks, or "language integrated code" or "convenience code", "sugar modes", you know, about what the _grammar_ specifications would be, and the lexical and syntax the specifications, to arrive at a multi-pass parser, that compiles a whole bunch of language specs, finds which ones apply where to the compilation unit, then starts building them up "lifting" them above the character sequence, building an "abstract syntax sequence" (yeah I know) above that, then building a model of the productions directly above that, that happens to be exactly derived from the grammar productions, with the same sort of structure as the grammar productions. (Order, loop, optional, a superset of eBNF, to support syntaxes with bracket blocks like C-style and syntaxes with indent blocks though I'm not into that, the various inversions of comments and code, the various interpolations of quoting, brackets and grouping and precedence, commas and joining and separating, and because SQL doesn't really comport itself to BNF, these kinds of things.) Of course it's obligatory that this would be about C/C++ and as with regards to Java which of course is in the same style, or that its derivative, is for example that M4/C/C++ code is already to a multi-pass parser, and, Java at some point added language features which fundamentally require a multi-pass parser, so it's not like the entire resources of the mainframe has to fit a finite-state-machine on the read-head, in fact at compile-time specifically there's "it's fair to consider a concatenation of the compilation units as a linear input in space", then figuring the "liftings" are linear in that, in space, then that the productions whence derived are as concise as the productions a minimal model, thus discardable the intermediate bit, is for introducing a sort of common model of language representation, source language, for reference implementations of the grammars, then to make the act of ingestion of sources in languages as a first-class kind of thing, I'm looking for one of those, and that's about as much I've figured out it is. It's such a usual idea I must imagine that it's commonplace, as it's just the very most simple act of the model of iterating these things and reading them out. I probably might not care about it but getting to where it takes a parser that can parse SQL for example, or, you know, when there are lots of source formats but it's just data and definitions, yeah if you know that there's like a very active open project in that I'd be real interested in a sort of "source/object/relational mapping", ..., as it were, "source/grammatical-production mapping", what results you identify grammars and pick sources and it prints out the things. I'm familiar with the traditional approaches, and intend to employ them. I figure this must be a very traditional approach if nobody's heard of it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 19:27 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <usb1lc$mbth$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383423 |
On 3/6/24 14:50, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > On 2024-03-06, James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote: ... >> Notice that in your following link, "en" appears at the beginning to >> indicate the use of English. "simple" at the beginning of the above link >> serves the same purpose. "Simple English" is it's own language, closely >> related to standard English. > > Where is Simple English spoken? Is there some geographic area where > native speakers concentrate? It's a constructed language, which probably has no native speakers. See <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructed_language>. Wikipedia has articles in several constructed languages. The two biggest such languages are Esperanto, with 350,598, and Simple English with 248,540.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-07 03:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <usbb01$rnkd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383431 |
On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 19:27:24 -0500, James Kuyper wrote: > It's a constructed language, which probably has no native speakers. Not to be confused with Basic English, which was created, and copyrighted by, C K Ogden.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-07 14:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <usd4gb$170b1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383437 |
On 3/6/24 22:06, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 19:27:24 -0500, James Kuyper wrote: > >> It's a constructed language, which probably has no native speakers. > > Not to be confused with Basic English, which was created, and copyrighted > by, C K Ogden. Simple English is the term used by Wikipedia for one of it's language-specific subsets. One of it's requirements is that the articles be written in Basic English as much as possible. See <https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_write_Simple_English_pages#Basic_English_and_VOA_Special_English> for details.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-07 23:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <usdjgk$1a50p$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383455 |
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 14:28:11 -0500, James Kuyper wrote: > One of it's requirements is that the articles be written in Basic > English as much as possible. Interesting, because it was Ogden’s protectiveness of his copyright that killed off any initial chance of Basic English taking off, back in the day. I guess that’s expired now.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 07:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87h6hjpdsi.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #383415 |
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> Whoever wrote this short Wikipedia article on it got confused too as
> it uses both Ada and ADA:
>
> https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_(programming_language)
Fixed.
[...]
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Medtronic
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 14:14 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <usapsq$l26r$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383412 |
On 3/6/2024 5:31 AM, David Brown wrote: > On 05/03/2024 23:34, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> On 3/5/2024 2:11 PM, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> writes: >>> [...] >>>> ADA is bullet proof... Until its not... ;^) >>> >>> The language is called Ada, not ADA. >> >> I wonder how many people got confused? >> > > Apparently you and Malcolm got confused. > > Others who mentioned the language know it is called "Ada". I not only > corrected you, but gave an explanation of it, in the hope that with that > clarity, you'd learn. > ADA = nothing Ada = the language of Ada Got it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-05 13:58 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87plw8pci5.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #383395 |
Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> writes:
> On 2024-03-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 3/5/2024 2:27 AM, David Brown wrote:
>>> On 05/03/2024 08:08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 00:03:54 -0600, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/3/2024 11:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Did you know the life-support system on the
>>>>>> International Space Station was written in Ada? Not something you would
>>>>>> trust C++ code to, let’s face it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most of the Ada code was written in C or C++ and converted to Ada for
>>>>> delivery.
>>>>
>>>> Was it debugged again? Or was it assumed that the translation was bug-
>>>> free?
>>>
>>> With Ada, if you can get it to compile, it's ready to ship :-)
>>>
>> Really? Any logic errors in the program itself?
>
> Ariane 5 rocket incident of 1996: The Ada code didn't catch the hardware
> overflow exception from forcing a 64 bit floating-point value into a 16
> bit integer. The situation was not expected by the code which was
> developed for the Ariane 4, or something like that.
A numeric overflow occurred during the Ariane 5's initial flight -- and
the software *did* catch the overflow. The same overflow didn't occur
on Ariane 4 because of its different flight profile. There was a
management decision to reuse the Ariane 4 flight software for Ariane 5
without sufficient review.
The code (which had been thoroughly tested on Ariane 4 and was known not
to overflow) emitted an error message describing the overflow exception.
That error message was then processed as data. Another problem was that
systems were designed to shut down on any error; as a result, healthy
and necessary equipment was shut down prematurely.
This is from my vague memory, and may not be entirely accurate.
*Of course* logic errors are possible in Ada programs, but in my
experience and that of many other programmers, if you get an Ada program
to compile (and run without raising unhandled exceptions), you're likely
to be much closer to a working program than if you get a C program to
compile. A typo in a C program is more likely to result in a valid
program with different semantics.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Medtronic
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-05 14:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <us84q3$3vqtf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383399 |
On 3/5/2024 1:58 PM, Keith Thompson wrote: > Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> writes: >> On 2024-03-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 3/5/2024 2:27 AM, David Brown wrote: >>>> On 05/03/2024 08:08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 00:03:54 -0600, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 3/3/2024 11:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Did you know the life-support system on the >>>>>>> International Space Station was written in Ada? Not something you would >>>>>>> trust C++ code to, let’s face it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Most of the Ada code was written in C or C++ and converted to Ada for >>>>>> delivery. >>>>> >>>>> Was it debugged again? Or was it assumed that the translation was bug- >>>>> free? >>>> >>>> With Ada, if you can get it to compile, it's ready to ship :-) >>>> >>> Really? Any logic errors in the program itself? >> >> Ariane 5 rocket incident of 1996: The Ada code didn't catch the hardware >> overflow exception from forcing a 64 bit floating-point value into a 16 >> bit integer. The situation was not expected by the code which was >> developed for the Ariane 4, or something like that. > > A numeric overflow occurred during the Ariane 5's initial flight -- and > the software *did* catch the overflow. The same overflow didn't occur > on Ariane 4 because of its different flight profile. There was a > management decision to reuse the Ariane 4 flight software for Ariane 5 > without sufficient review. > > The code (which had been thoroughly tested on Ariane 4 and was known not > to overflow) emitted an error message describing the overflow exception. > That error message was then processed as data. Another problem was that > systems were designed to shut down on any error; as a result, healthy > and necessary equipment was shut down prematurely. > > This is from my vague memory, and may not be entirely accurate. > > *Of course* logic errors are possible in Ada programs, but in my > experience and that of many other programmers, if you get an Ada program > to compile (and run without raising unhandled exceptions), you're likely > to be much closer to a working program than if you get a C program to > compile. A typo in a C program is more likely to result in a valid > program with different semantics. > So close you can just feel its a 100% correct and working program?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 14:34 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <us9rdq$eiqh$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383400 |
On 05/03/2024 23:02, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 3/5/2024 1:58 PM, Keith Thompson wrote: >> Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> writes: >>> On 2024-03-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 3/5/2024 2:27 AM, David Brown wrote: >>>>> On 05/03/2024 08:08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 00:03:54 -0600, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 3/3/2024 11:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Did you know the life-support system on the >>>>>>>> International Space Station was written in Ada? Not something >>>>>>>> you would >>>>>>>> trust C++ code to, let’s face it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Most of the Ada code was written in C or C++ and converted to Ada >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> delivery. >>>>>> >>>>>> Was it debugged again? Or was it assumed that the translation was >>>>>> bug- >>>>>> free? >>>>> >>>>> With Ada, if you can get it to compile, it's ready to ship :-) >>>>> >>>> Really? Any logic errors in the program itself? >>> >>> Ariane 5 rocket incident of 1996: The Ada code didn't catch the hardware >>> overflow exception from forcing a 64 bit floating-point value into a 16 >>> bit integer. The situation was not expected by the code which was >>> developed for the Ariane 4, or something like that. >> >> A numeric overflow occurred during the Ariane 5's initial flight -- and >> the software *did* catch the overflow. The same overflow didn't occur >> on Ariane 4 because of its different flight profile. There was a >> management decision to reuse the Ariane 4 flight software for Ariane 5 >> without sufficient review. >> >> The code (which had been thoroughly tested on Ariane 4 and was known not >> to overflow) emitted an error message describing the overflow exception. >> That error message was then processed as data. Another problem was that >> systems were designed to shut down on any error; as a result, healthy >> and necessary equipment was shut down prematurely. >> >> This is from my vague memory, and may not be entirely accurate. That matches my recollection too. >> >> *Of course* logic errors are possible in Ada programs, but in my >> experience and that of many other programmers, if you get an Ada program >> to compile (and run without raising unhandled exceptions), you're likely >> to be much closer to a working program than if you get a C program to >> compile. A typo in a C program is more likely to result in a valid >> program with different semantics. >> > > So close you can just feel its a 100% correct and working program? Didn't you notice the smiley in my comment? It used to be a running joke that if you managed to get your Ada code to compile, it was ready to ship. The emphasis is on the word "joke".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-06 14:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <usapr6$l26r$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #383413 |
On 3/6/2024 5:34 AM, David Brown wrote: > On 05/03/2024 23:02, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> On 3/5/2024 1:58 PM, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> writes: >>>> On 2024-03-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On 3/5/2024 2:27 AM, David Brown wrote: >>>>>> On 05/03/2024 08:08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 00:03:54 -0600, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 3/3/2024 11:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Did you know the life-support system on the >>>>>>>>> International Space Station was written in Ada? Not something >>>>>>>>> you would >>>>>>>>> trust C++ code to, let’s face it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Most of the Ada code was written in C or C++ and converted to >>>>>>>> Ada for >>>>>>>> delivery. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Was it debugged again? Or was it assumed that the translation was >>>>>>> bug- >>>>>>> free? >>>>>> >>>>>> With Ada, if you can get it to compile, it's ready to ship :-) >>>>>> >>>>> Really? Any logic errors in the program itself? >>>> >>>> Ariane 5 rocket incident of 1996: The Ada code didn't catch the >>>> hardware >>>> overflow exception from forcing a 64 bit floating-point value into a 16 >>>> bit integer. The situation was not expected by the code which was >>>> developed for the Ariane 4, or something like that. >>> >>> A numeric overflow occurred during the Ariane 5's initial flight -- and >>> the software *did* catch the overflow. The same overflow didn't occur >>> on Ariane 4 because of its different flight profile. There was a >>> management decision to reuse the Ariane 4 flight software for Ariane 5 >>> without sufficient review. >>> >>> The code (which had been thoroughly tested on Ariane 4 and was known not >>> to overflow) emitted an error message describing the overflow exception. >>> That error message was then processed as data. Another problem was that >>> systems were designed to shut down on any error; as a result, healthy >>> and necessary equipment was shut down prematurely. >>> >>> This is from my vague memory, and may not be entirely accurate. > > That matches my recollection too. > >>> >>> *Of course* logic errors are possible in Ada programs, but in my >>> experience and that of many other programmers, if you get an Ada program >>> to compile (and run without raising unhandled exceptions), you're likely >>> to be much closer to a working program than if you get a C program to >>> compile. A typo in a C program is more likely to result in a valid >>> program with different semantics. >>> >> >> So close you can just feel its a 100% correct and working program? > > Didn't you notice the smiley in my comment? It used to be a running > joke that if you managed to get your Ada code to compile, it was ready > to ship. The emphasis is on the word "joke". > You jest whooshed over my head. Sorry! Humm, well, shit. ;^o
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 11 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 9 10 [11] 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web