Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c > #396916 > unrolled thread

Isn't that beauty ?

Started byBonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>
First post2026-03-12 07:24 +0100
Last post2026-03-27 17:03 +0000
Articles 11 on this page of 231 — 18 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c


Contents

  Isn't that beauty ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 07:24 +0100
    Re: Isn't that beauty ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 07:26 +0100
    Re: Isn't that beauty ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 09:32 +0100
      Re: Isn't that beauty ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 11:36 +0100
        Re: Isn't that beauty ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 20:15 +0100
    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-12 10:00 -0400
      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 15:03 +0100
        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-03-12 15:27 +0100
          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 15:34 +0100
      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 15:13 +0100
        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-12 10:43 -0400
          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:10 +0100
            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-12 11:22 -0400
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:25 +0100
                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:25 +0100
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:48 +0100
                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 20:25 +0100
                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 00:57 +0100
                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-13 02:19 +0100
                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 06:14 +0100
                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 01:48 -0700
                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 09:49 +0100
                            [OT] AI - questions and answers (was Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-13 10:27 +0100
                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 11:59 -0700
                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-12 21:22 -0400
                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 06:15 +0100
                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 06:48 +0100
                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-14 03:29 -0400
            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:44 +0100
            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-12 17:32 +0000
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 00:56 +0100
                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 11:54 -0700
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 01:14 +0100
            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-12 16:18 -0400
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 01:06 +0100
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 01:27 +0100
                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 16:11 -0400
                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 06:01 +0100
                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-14 01:49 -0400
                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 07:23 +0100
                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-14 02:58 -0400
                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 07:52 +0100
                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 07:53 +0100
                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-14 03:05 -0400
                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 08:10 +0100
                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-14 03:17 -0400
                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 08:59 +0100
                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 09:12 +0100
                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-14 12:15 +0000
                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 14:00 +0100
                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 16:43 -0400
                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-16 20:57 +0000
                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 19:07 -0400
                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-17 00:49 +0000
                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-17 05:21 +0100
                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-18 12:40 -0400
                                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-18 17:06 +0000
                                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-18 15:46 -0400
                                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-18 22:14 +0000
                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-19 22:39 +0000
                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-18 16:14 -0400
                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-19 22:42 +0000
                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-17 14:46 +0000
                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-16 22:26 +0000
                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-16 22:35 +0000
                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 19:09 -0400
                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-16 23:17 +0000
                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 19:21 -0400
                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-16 23:34 +0000
                                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-17 00:09 +0000
                                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 21:45 -0400
                                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-17 10:42 +0000
                                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-17 13:04 +0100
                                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-17 12:17 +0000
                                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-17 12:31 +0000
                                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 21:27 -0400
                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-16 22:26 +0000
                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 19:41 -0400
                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-17 00:29 +0000
                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-17 05:38 +0100
                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-17 11:47 +0000
                                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-17 13:08 +0100
                                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-17 12:37 +0000
                                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-18 02:40 +0100
                                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-18 11:21 +0200
                                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-18 10:49 +0100
                                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-18 15:10 +0000
                                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-03-18 21:20 +0000
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-18 23:13 +0000
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 13:23 -0700
                                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-18 11:20 +0100
                                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-18 21:57 +0100
                                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-18 22:01 +0100
                                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-19 10:43 +0100
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 12:23 +0200
                                                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-19 15:22 +0100
                                                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-19 15:07 +0000
                                                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 04:16 +0100
                                                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 02:14 -0700
                                                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 12:38 +0100
                                                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 13:06 +0100
                                                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 13:27 +0100
                                                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 13:22 -0700
                                                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-21 02:25 +0100
                                                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-19 16:13 +0100
                                                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 17:41 +0200
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 04:01 +0100
                                                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-20 08:35 +0100
                                                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 12:47 +0100
                                                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 14:42 +0200
                                                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-22 04:39 +0100
                                                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-22 08:33 +0200
                                                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-20 17:10 -0400
                                                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-21 02:53 +0100
                                                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-20 22:35 -0400
                                                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-21 14:42 +0000
                                                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-22 04:57 +0100
                                                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 12:32 -0700
                                                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-22 04:50 +0100
                                                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-21 15:39 +0100
                                                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-22 15:48 -0400
                                                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-22 23:04 +0100
                                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-03-19 13:28 +0000
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 03:45 +0100
                                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 11:19 +0200
                                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-19 10:49 +0100
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-03-19 14:09 +0000
                                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-19 14:49 +0000
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 17:09 +0200
                                                      sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 17:29 +0200
                                                        Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-19 18:33 +0000
                                                          Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 21:40 +0200
                                                            Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-19 23:53 +0000
                                                              Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-20 00:15 +0000
                                                              Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 05:05 +0100
                                                                Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 12:58 +0200
                                                                  Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 12:53 +0100
                                                                  Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 13:13 +0100
                                                                    Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-20 13:26 +0100
                                                                      Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 15:08 +0200
                                                                        Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-20 13:43 +0000
                                                                          Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 15:51 +0200
                                                                        Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-20 14:47 +0100
                                                                          Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-22 02:03 +0200
                                                                            Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-22 04:03 +0100
                                                                            Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 15:13 -0700
                                                                              Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-07 02:22 +0300
                                                                                Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 21:00 -0700
                                                                                  Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-07 09:37 +0300
                                                                                    Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-07 21:54 -0700
                                                                                      Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-09 16:06 +0000
                                                                                        Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-11 09:04 -0700
                                                                                          Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-11 19:55 +0000
                                                                                  Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-04-07 14:46 +0000
                                                                                    Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-07 20:04 -0700
                                                                                      Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-09 21:15 +0000
                                                                                        Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-10 01:31 +0300
                                                                                          Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-12 06:17 -0700
                                                                                        Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-11 21:32 -0700
                                                                                          Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-12 04:59 +0000
                                                                                            Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-26 07:29 -0700
                                                                                      Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-04-09 23:33 +0000
                                                                                        Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-10 11:35 +0000
                                                                                        Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-12 07:13 -0700
                                                                                          Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-13 20:44 +0000
                                                                                            Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-25 15:47 -0700
                                                                                              Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-27 02:04 +0000
                                                                                                Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-26 22:27 -0700
                                                                                                  Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-27 14:41 +0000
                                                              Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 14:01 +0200
                                                                Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 13:48 -0700
                                                                  Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-07 01:58 +0300
                                                                    Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-04-07 01:02 +0100
                                                                    Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-07 08:01 -0700
                                                          Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-03-19 23:21 +0000
                                                        Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 18:37 -0700
                                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 04:33 +0100
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 14:24 +0200
                                                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-22 05:06 +0100
                                                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-22 09:30 +0200
                                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-07 02:12 -0700
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-07 14:00 +0300
                                                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-16 10:23 -0700
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-04-07 16:39 -0400
                                                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-12 11:16 -0700
                                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-25 00:45 +0000
                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-17 06:25 +0100
                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-20 01:33 +0000
                                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 07:42 +0100
                                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-20 12:16 +0000
                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-14 16:22 +0000
                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 18:04 +0100
                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-14 17:39 +0000
                                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 19:25 +0100
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-13 00:54 +0000
                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 00:31 -0400
                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 06:24 +0100
                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 01:40 -0400
                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 01:34 -0400
                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-13 14:38 +0000
                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-13 15:31 +0000
                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-15 13:15 -0700
                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-16 15:18 +0000
                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-23 21:23 -0700
                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2026-03-13 18:47 -0400
                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-15 14:38 -0700
                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 07:24 +0100
                    Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 01:51 -0700
                      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 09:54 +0100
                        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-13 10:29 +0100
                          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 10:33 +0100
                            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 11:57 -0700
                              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 11:58 -0700
                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-13 14:29 +0000
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 08:08 +0100
                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 04:19 -0400
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 09:53 +0100
                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 09:56 +0100
                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 05:10 -0400
                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 10:14 +0100
            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-13 17:32 +0000
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 18:44 +0100
                Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-13 19:36 +0000
                  Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 06:03 +0100
        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-12 16:56 +0000
      Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-20 23:07 -0700
        Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-22 16:55 -0400
          Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-26 20:08 -0700
            Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-27 00:35 -0400
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-26 21:53 -0700
              Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-27 17:03 +0000

Page 12 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12]


#396975 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

FromBart <bc@freeuk.com>
Date2026-03-13 17:32 +0000
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<10p1hmp$3dmtq$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#396929
On 12/03/2026 15:10, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 12.03.2026 um 15:43 schrieb DFS:
>> On 3/12/2026 10:13 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>> Here, do that in C:
>>>
>>> static optional<size_t> parse( const char *str )
>>> {
>>>      size_t ret;
>>>      if( from_chars_result fcr = from_chars( str, str + 
>>> strlen( str ), ret ); (bool)fcr.ec || *fcr.ptr )
>>>          return nullopt;
>>>      return ret;
>>> }
>>
>>
>> Explain in detail what it does.
> 
> If that isn't self-explanatory stick with C.
> 
> I've got a task for you: Do the same in C:
> 
> #include <iostream>
> #include <regex>
> #include <fstream>
> #include <vector>
> #include <algorithm>
> #include <vector>
> 
> using namespace std;
> 
> int main( int argc, char **argv )
> {
>      if( argc < 2 )
>          return EXIT_FAILURE;
>      ifstream ifs( argv[1] );
>      static regex rxNameTel( "^\\s*\"([^\"]*)\"\\s*\"([^\"]*)\"\\s*$" );
>      struct name_tel { string name, tel; };
>      vector<name_tel> phoneList;
>      while( !ifs.eof() )
>      {
>          string line;
>          getline( ifs, line );
>          match_results<string::const_iterator> sm;
>          if( regex_match( line, sm, rxNameTel ) )
>              phoneList.emplace_back( string( sm[1].first, 
> sm[1].second ), string( sm[2].first, sm[2].second ) );
>      }
>      sort( phoneList.begin(), phoneList.end(),
>          []( const name_tel &left, const name_tel &right ) { return 
> left.name < right.name; } );
>      for( name_tel &phone : phoneList )
>          cout << "\"" << phone.name << "\"\t\"" << phone.tel << "\"" << 
> endl;
> }
> 
> 1. Read a file and parse it with ne mentioned regex-pattern.
> 2. Split both parts of every line in two strings.
> 3. Sort the "vector" according to the first string.
> 4. Print it.
> 
> I guess you don't manage to do that with less than five times the work.


This stuff is child's play with any scripting language. The code will 
also be cleaner and simpler.

Here you're trying to write C++ as though it was a scripting language, 
by utilising its many bundled libraries, but it fails badly.

There is too much excruciating detail that you still have to write. Even 
the easy bit, printing the sorted list, is a mess of punctuation.

In mine, if I use a similar record type and table name, the loop is:

     for x in phonelist do
         println x.name:"q15jl", x.tel:"q"
     end

('q' adds quotes; '15' is field width; 'jl' is left-justified. Note your 
output uses hard tabs, which can give unpredictable output.)

While your compare function:

    []( const name_tel &left, const name_tel &right ) { return left.name 
< right.name; }

would be '{l,r: l.name < r.name}'

 >I guess you don't manage to do that with less than five times the work.
Every external lib allowed.

If external libraries are allowed then C wouldn't be five times the line 
count. They just don't come as standard.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#396976 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

FromBonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>
Date2026-03-13 18:44 +0100
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<10p1id8$3dt62$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#396975
Am 13.03.2026 um 18:32 schrieb Bart:

> This stuff is child's play with any scripting language. The code will 
> also be cleaner and simpler.

Also the C programms here that do similar things. But if your require-
ment is systems programming or performance you won't chose a scripting
language.
You're really narrow-minded if you see it so superficially.

> Here you're trying to write C++ as though it was a scripting language, 
> by utilising its many bundled libraries, but it fails badly.

No, the code works correctly according to the requirements.

> There is too much excruciating detail that you still have to write.
> Even the easy bit, printing the sorted list, is a mess of punctuation.

You're focussed on details without seeing the concept.

> While your compare function:
> 
>     []( const name_tel &left, const name_tel &right ) { return left.name 
> < right.name; }
> would be '{l,r: l.name < r.name}'

Yes, with one percent of the performance.

> If external libraries are allowed then C wouldn't be five times the line 
> count. They just don't come as standard.

The handling of the external libraries is much more complex.
In C++ you won't have to deal with error handling (exceptions)
and there is no explicit memory management if you use containers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#396981 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

FromBart <bc@freeuk.com>
Date2026-03-13 19:36 +0000
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<10p1p07$3h6qm$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#396976
On 13/03/2026 17:44, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 13.03.2026 um 18:32 schrieb Bart:
> 
>> This stuff is child's play with any scripting language. The code will 
>> also be cleaner and simpler.
> 
> Also the C programms here that do similar things. But if your require-
> ment is systems programming or performance you won't chose a scripting
> language.
> You're really narrow-minded if you see it so superficially.
> 
>> Here you're trying to write C++ as though it was a scripting language, 
>> by utilising its many bundled libraries, but it fails badly.
> 
> No, the code works correctly according to the requirements.
> 
>> There is too much excruciating detail that you still have to write.
>> Even the easy bit, printing the sorted list, is a mess of punctuation.
> 
> You're focussed on details without seeing the concept.

We're not interested in those details! The task is what's important.


>> While your compare function:
>>
>>     []( const name_tel &left, const name_tel &right ) { return 
>> left.name < right.name; }
>> would be '{l,r: l.name < r.name}'
> 
> Yes, with one percent of the performance.

It's not that bad. An example of sorting millions of such records by 
name, was 13x slower with my scripting language than g++-03.

That's with the sort function itself written in that language. With 
CPython where it is built-in, it was only 3x as slow. This is before any 
acceleration is applied.

There are also languages that are statically typed but have cleaner 
syntax with much less boilerplate, and compile to native code.

Obviously that is a far more preferable direction to go in.

BTW that C++ test, based on your small example, took 3 seconds to 
compile. It must be pulling in a huge amount of stuff.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#396986 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

FromBonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>
Date2026-03-14 06:03 +0100
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<10p2q7c$3umkh$2@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#396981
Am 13.03.2026 um 20:36 schrieb Bart:

> BTW that C++ test, based on your small example, took 3 seconds
> to compile. It must be pulling in a huge amount of stuff.

With C++20 modules that's much faster, but I don't use them since
I've got a fast computer.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#396937 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2026-03-12 16:56 +0000
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<rfCsR.88$cH4.70@fx03.iad>
In reply to#396925
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> writes:
>Here, do that in C:
>
>static optional<size_t> parse( const char *str )
>{
>	size_t ret;
>	if( from_chars_result fcr = from_chars( str, str + strlen( str ), ret 
>); (bool)fcr.ec || *fcr.ptr )
>		return nullopt;
>	return ret;
>}
>

bool parse(const char *str, size_t *rval)
{
   char *cp;
   *rval = strtoul(str, &cp, 0);
   if ((cp == str) || (*cp != '\0')) {
      return false;
   }
   return true;
}

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#397128 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

FromTim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Date2026-03-20 23:07 -0700
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<86v7ep4sxm.fsf@linuxsc.com>
In reply to#396923
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes:

> On 3/12/2026 2:24 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>
>> There was a programming-"contest" on comp.lang.c and I wanted to show
>> the simpler code in C, here it is:
>>
>> [C++ code]
>>
>> C++ really rocks since you've to deal with much less details than in C.
>
> Is your strategy to just ignore reality, and keep making bogus claims
> that - for this challenge at least - you can't support?

Please don't encourage people who insist on using comp.lang.c
for other languages.  It's better to just ignore them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#397146 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

FromDFS <nospam@dfs.com>
Date2026-03-22 16:55 -0400
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<10ppl0a$3jcc8$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to#397128
On 3/21/2026 2:07 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes:
> 
>> On 3/12/2026 2:24 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>
>>> There was a programming-"contest" on comp.lang.c and I wanted to show
>>> the simpler code in C, here it is:
>>>
>>> [C++ code]
>>>
>>> C++ really rocks since you've to deal with much less details than in C.
>>
>> Is your strategy to just ignore reality, and keep making bogus claims
>> that - for this challenge at least - you can't support?
> 
> Please don't encourage people who insist on using comp.lang.c
> for other languages.  It's better to just ignore them.


It doesn't bother me.  It's no more off-topic than a discussion of 
sorting algorithms.

I think someone hit Montero over the head with K&R 2nd Edition.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#397213 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

FromTim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Date2026-03-26 20:08 -0700
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<86o6ka2cls.fsf@linuxsc.com>
In reply to#397146
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes:

> On 3/21/2026 2:07 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>
>> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 3/12/2026 2:24 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>
>>>> There was a programming-"contest" on comp.lang.c and I wanted to show
>>>> the simpler code in C, here it is:
>>>>
>>>> [C++ code]
>>>>
>>>> C++ really rocks since you've to deal with much less details than in C.
>>>
>>> Is your strategy to just ignore reality, and keep making bogus claims
>>> that - for this challenge at least - you can't support?
>>
>> Please don't encourage people who insist on using comp.lang.c
>> for other languages.  It's better to just ignore them.
>
> It doesn't bother me.

I'm sorry you place so little value on my participation.

> It's no more off-topic than a discussion of sorting algorithms.

That's wrong.  There have been lots of posts in the discussion of
sorting that are relevant to C.  The problem with encouraging
discussion of C++, or Python, or other such languages, is they
tend to produce lots of postings that have nothing to do with C,
and rarely produce postings that have anything to do with C.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#397215 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

FromDFS <nospam@dfs.com>
Date2026-03-27 00:35 -0400
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<10q51er$3ec1o$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#397213
On 3/26/2026 11:08 PM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes:
> 
>> On 3/21/2026 2:07 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>
>>> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 3/12/2026 2:24 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There was a programming-"contest" on comp.lang.c and I wanted to show
>>>>> the simpler code in C, here it is:
>>>>>
>>>>> [C++ code]
>>>>>
>>>>> C++ really rocks since you've to deal with much less details than in C.
>>>>
>>>> Is your strategy to just ignore reality, and keep making bogus claims
>>>> that - for this challenge at least - you can't support?
>>>
>>> Please don't encourage people who insist on using comp.lang.c
>>> for other languages.  It's better to just ignore them.
>>
>> It doesn't bother me.
> 
> I'm sorry you place so little value on my participation.


Not true at all [1].  But clc is a "No Kings" newsgroup, and nobody can 
dictate who or what kind of posts are made.  If Montero or I annoy you, 
killfile us.



>> It's no more off-topic than a discussion of sorting algorithms.
> 
> That's wrong.  There have been lots of posts in the discussion of
> sorting that are relevant to C.  The problem with encouraging
> discussion of C++, or Python, or other such languages, is they
> tend to produce lots of postings that have nothing to do with C,
> and rarely produce postings that have anything to do with C.

As a percent, I don't see lots of postings that have nothing to do with C.

This group is still very clean, as opposed to the rec.sport.golf group I 
used to participate in; non-golfing interlopers completely wrecked it 
years ago.




[1] You da man.  You deserve another kudos with your performance in the 
'sort of trivial code' challenge.  I was looking at that code again, and 
it's kind of mind-blowing.  Is that what you do to challenge yourself? 
How long have you been writing C programs?  Do you do it for a living?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#397217 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

FromKeith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Date2026-03-26 21:53 -0700
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<87tsu1ootz.fsf@example.invalid>
In reply to#397215
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> writes:
[...]
> Not true at all [1].  But clc is a "No Kings" newsgroup, and nobody
> can dictate who or what kind of posts are made.  If Montero or I annoy
> you, killfile us.
[...]

There is no authority that can enforce topicality rules in
comp.lang.c.  But come on, the name of the programming language is
right in the name.

A lot of other languages have their own newsgroups, some of which
I actually read.  Posts about language Foo, with no C content,
are better posted to comp.lang.foo, or perhaps to comp.lang.misc
if comp.lang.foo doesn't exist, or to comp.programming if the post
is more about algorithms than about the language, or ....

I dislike posts here that have no C content at all, and there have
been too many such posts lately.

-- 
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]


#397230 — Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)

Fromgazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack)
Date2026-03-27 17:03 +0000
SubjectRe: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)
Message-ID<10q6d8k$34qhr$1@news.xmission.com>
In reply to#397215
In article <10q51er$3ec1o$3@dont-email.me>, DFS  <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
...
(Tim wrote)
>> I'm sorry you place so little value on my participation.

>Not true at all [1].  But clc is a "No Kings" newsgroup, and nobody can 
>dictate who or what kind of posts are made.  If Montero or I annoy you, 
>killfile us.

I think yuo get this week's "Totally Missing the Point" award.

-- 
I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget
what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.

 - Maya Angelou -

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 12 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c


csiph-web