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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #6608 > unrolled thread

reading from a socket

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

Contents

  reading from a socket Steve Richter <stephenrichter@gmail.com> - 2011-06-22 06:27 -0700
    Re: reading from a socket Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2011-06-22 15:32 +0200
      Re: reading from a socket Steve Richter <stephenrichter@gmail.com> - 2011-06-22 06:38 -0700
        Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 08:15 -0700
          Re: reading from a socket John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-06-22 15:33 +0000
            Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 08:55 -0700
              Re: reading from a socket John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-06-22 17:38 +0000
                Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 11:00 -0700
                  Re: reading from a socket John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-06-22 18:16 +0000
                    Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 11:30 -0700
                      Re: reading from a socket John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-06-22 18:51 +0000
                        Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 11:57 -0700
                      Re: reading from a socket Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-22 13:03 -0700
                        Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 13:09 -0700
                          Re: reading from a socket Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2011-06-22 18:18 -0500
                        Re: reading from a socket gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-06-22 20:43 +0000
                        Re: reading from a socket Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-06-23 21:50 -0700
                    Re: reading from a socket pacman@kosh.dhis.org (Alan Curry) - 2011-06-22 20:52 +0000
                      Re: reading from a socket Dr Nick <3-nospam@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2011-06-23 08:39 +0100
                      Re: reading from a socket James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-23 06:45 -0400
              Re: reading from a socket Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-06-22 20:51 -0400
                Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 19:41 -0700
          Re: reading from a socket Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-22 09:17 -0700
            Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 09:29 -0700
              Re: reading from a socket John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-06-22 16:51 +0000
              Re: reading from a socket Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-06-22 17:54 +0100
                Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 10:51 -0700
                  Re: reading from a socket Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-06-22 18:29 +0000
                    Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 11:36 -0700
                      Re: reading from a socket Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2011-06-23 12:02 +0200
                        Re: reading from a socket Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-06-23 10:08 +0000
                          Re: reading from a socket Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-23 08:27 -0700
                        Re: reading from a socket James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-23 06:51 -0400
                  Re: reading from a socket Tom St Denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2011-06-22 11:34 -0700
                    Re: reading from a socket BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 11:43 -0700
                      Re: reading from a socket Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-22 12:56 -0700
                        Re: reading from a socket gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-06-22 20:47 +0000
                OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-06-22 19:58 +0000
                  Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-22 13:34 -0700
                    Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) ralph <nt_consulting64@yahoo.net> - 2011-06-22 16:14 -0500
                  Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-06-22 21:55 +0100
                  Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) ralph <nt_consulting64@yahoo.net> - 2011-06-22 16:11 -0500
                    Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-06-23 17:05 +0000
                      Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-23 11:28 -0700
                  Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-06-23 21:58 -0700
                    Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-24 00:33 -0700
                      Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-06-24 03:07 -0700
                        Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-24 10:32 -0700
                          Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-06-24 11:40 -0700
                            Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-06-24 20:23 +0000
                          Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-06-24 12:17 -0700
                          Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-06-24 21:49 +0100
                      Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-06-24 19:39 +0000
                        Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-24 13:30 -0700
                          Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-06-24 22:48 +0000
    Re: reading from a socket "Heinrich Wolf" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2011-06-22 22:40 +0200
      Re: reading from a socket "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-06-23 09:03 +0200
    Re: reading from a socket Vinicio Flores <vfloreshdz@gmail.com> - 2011-07-03 19:32 -0600

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#6663 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

"blmblm@myrealbox.com" <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:96evqmF46aU3@mid.individual.net...
> In article 
> <0.30901f4ebae96e49c2ff.20110622175451BST.8762nxdcx0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
> Ben Bacarisse  <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>> BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> [ snip ]
>
>> > or such...
>>
>> Eh?
>>
>
> Maybe you're making a different point, Ben, but this reminds me
> that I'm curious about that "or such" -- to me it doesn't seem like
> native-speaker-idiomatic English, and I'm mildly curious about whether
> it's idiomatic in some English I don't know, or perhaps a word-for-word
> translation of something idiomatic in another language.  BGB -- ?

Better try asking in alt.english.usage.

After all no-one in comp.lang.c is going to be competent enough to answer 
questions about English...

-- 
Bartc

 

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

#6664 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

On 22 Jun 2011 19:58:15 GMT, blmblm@myrealbox.com
<blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> wrote:

>In article <0.30901f4ebae96e49c2ff.20110622175451BST.8762nxdcx0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
>Ben Bacarisse  <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>> BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>[ snip ]
>
>> > or such...
>> 
>> Eh?
>> 
>
>Maybe you're making a different point, Ben, but this reminds me
>that I'm curious about that "or such" -- to me it doesn't seem like
>native-speaker-idiomatic English, and I'm mildly curious about whether
>it's idiomatic in some English I don't know, or perhaps a word-for-word
>translation of something idiomatic in another language.  BGB -- ?

A very common expression in American speech. It is a contraction of
the idiom "such and such".

-ralph

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

#6745 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

In article <8el407t0824fvr22h1hi1etggqoso04m1n@4ax.com>,
ralph  <nt_consulting64@yahoo.net> wrote:
> On 22 Jun 2011 19:58:15 GMT, blmblm@myrealbox.com
> <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >In article <0.30901f4ebae96e49c2ff.20110622175451BST.8762nxdcx0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
> >Ben Bacarisse  <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> >> BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> writes:
> >
> >[ snip ]
> >
> >> > or such...
> >> 
> >> Eh?
> >> 
> >
> >Maybe you're making a different point, Ben, but this reminds me
> >that I'm curious about that "or such" -- to me it doesn't seem like
> >native-speaker-idiomatic English, and I'm mildly curious about whether
> >it's idiomatic in some English I don't know, or perhaps a word-for-word
> >translation of something idiomatic in another language.  BGB -- ?
> 
> A very common expression in American speech. It is a contraction of
> the idiom "such and such".

Huh.  I'm a native speaker of American English, and it's new to me
(obviously).  

Now, "*and* such" I recognize as a common idiom, though more as
something one would use at the end of a list of things (e.g.,
"lions and tigers and such").  But not "or such".  Well, learn
something new, maybe.  Maybe, as someone else suggested, I *should*
ask in one of the language-usage groups (alt.usage.english would be
my preference).

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

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

#6749 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

On 6/23/2011 10:05 AM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> In article<8el407t0824fvr22h1hi1etggqoso04m1n@4ax.com>,
> ralph<nt_consulting64@yahoo.net>  wrote:
>> On 22 Jun 2011 19:58:15 GMT, blmblm@myrealbox.com
>> <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> In article<0.30901f4ebae96e49c2ff.20110622175451BST.8762nxdcx0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
>>> Ben Bacarisse<ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>  wrote:
>>>> BGB<cr88192@hotmail.com>  writes:
>>>
>>> [ snip ]
>>>
>>>>> or such...
>>>>
>>>> Eh?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe you're making a different point, Ben, but this reminds me
>>> that I'm curious about that "or such" -- to me it doesn't seem like
>>> native-speaker-idiomatic English, and I'm mildly curious about whether
>>> it's idiomatic in some English I don't know, or perhaps a word-for-word
>>> translation of something idiomatic in another language.  BGB -- ?
>>
>> A very common expression in American speech. It is a contraction of
>> the idiom "such and such".
>
> Huh.  I'm a native speaker of American English, and it's new to me
> (obviously).
>
> Now, "*and* such" I recognize as a common idiom, though more as
> something one would use at the end of a list of things (e.g.,
> "lions and tigers and such").  But not "or such".  Well, learn
> something new, maybe.  Maybe, as someone else suggested, I *should*
> ask in one of the language-usage groups (alt.usage.english would be
> my preference).
>

dunno.

in my case, parents were originally from the Oregon/Washington area (my 
dad from Washington, my mom from Oregon). ethnicity is mixed, but 
majority Scotch-Irish (AKA: Ulster Scots).

in the US, I have lived there (long ago), and also in Nevada and Arizona 
(current).

I have little idea if my speech or writing patterns are really common to 
anywhere though.

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

#6783 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

In article <96evqmF46aU3@mid.individual.net>,
 blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <0.30901f4ebae96e49c2ff.20110622175451BST.8762nxdcx0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
> Ben Bacarisse  <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> > BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> writes:
> 
> [ snip ]
> 
> > > or such...
> > 
> > Eh?
> > 
> 
> Maybe you're making a different point, Ben, but this reminds me
> that I'm curious about that "or such" -- to me it doesn't seem like
> native-speaker-idiomatic English, and I'm mildly curious about whether
> it's idiomatic in some English I don't know, or perhaps a word-for-word
> translation of something idiomatic in another language.  BGB -- ?

BGB chooses an idiomatic prose style.
I took him up once on it and was ignored.

-- 
Michael Press

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

#6808 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

On 6/23/2011 9:58 PM, Michael Press wrote:
> In article<96evqmF46aU3@mid.individual.net>,
>   blmblm@myrealbox.com<blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> In article<0.30901f4ebae96e49c2ff.20110622175451BST.8762nxdcx0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
>> Ben Bacarisse<ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>  wrote:
>>> BGB<cr88192@hotmail.com>  writes:
>>
>> [ snip ]
>>
>>>> or such...
>>>
>>> Eh?
>>>
>>
>> Maybe you're making a different point, Ben, but this reminds me
>> that I'm curious about that "or such" -- to me it doesn't seem like
>> native-speaker-idiomatic English, and I'm mildly curious about whether
>> it's idiomatic in some English I don't know, or perhaps a word-for-word
>> translation of something idiomatic in another language.  BGB -- ?
>
> BGB chooses an idiomatic prose style.
> I took him up once on it and was ignored.
>

I vaguely remember something like this, but at the time I did not have 
any good response, and it seemed like making a big fuss out of nothing, 
and I also didn't really feel much like responding to what appeared to 
be a personally directed attack.

I am well aware that my writing sucks, but it is slow and awkward to try 
to write more properly, so this is usually reserved for writing things 
like documentation and specifications and similar.

even then, things like writing papers or similar are something I tend to 
do poorly at in classes (teachers don't much like my papers).


I think my writing generally maps fairly well to what I think, so I 
mostly write whatever it is I am thinking about, and try where possible 
to avoid going off too much on random tangents (I am also prone to do 
this as well, as chains of thought may go A->B->C and drift ever further 
from the original topic, but on the upside, can often have multiple 
parallel chains of thought, and seem at least acceptable at multitasking 
and similar).

in terms of understanding things, I tend to understand everything fairly 
literally, and tend to generally fail to see/understand things like 
"implications" or "symbolism" or non-literal statements (I often just 
see something that doesn't make much sense, and am usually like "oh 
well, whatever", as it is often a lot of effort and guesswork to try to 
figure out what was being written about).


I am also not good with "principles" as often the principle bears 
little/no resemblance to the text it is usually based on (so it is often 
not clear what if anything the principle has to do with the input text).


I think my thinking far more often involves the use of "templates", 
where one has something in-mind which is similar to what they want, and 
so then they can tweak it in-mind until it does what they want it to do.

granted, there are often relatively few good ways to summarize things 
without making them no longer make sense, so describing something 
effectively often requires lots of words (or including links to relevant 
information and/or documents).


I generally like programming though, as at least most 
documentation/specs tend to make sense (usually far more sense than most 
casual writing), and am also prone to reading a lot of stuff off of 
wikis (one reads a wiki, gets distracted reading about various topics, 
multiple hours go by, then one realizes that their hours have been used 
up reading stuff off of a wiki).

I don't read much fiction though, nor all that many books in general.

I generally like online information, as then one can fetch whatever 
information they need at the moment.


granted, how this whole chain of events (in this thread) got in motion 
was by me making a misguided value judgment over what peoples' 
intentions were (whether or not I or anyone else was "correct" didn't 
really seem like so much of an issue, as "correct" is very often more a 
matter of perspective and interpretations and similar anyways, and 
usually is more a matter of whether or not things can be made to work as 
intended, so it was more the intentions involved which seemed relevant).

admittedly, I thought the OP was actually asking about a different issue 
as well (namely, about how to deal with the socket blocking on a read 
request when there was no input present).


a difficult thing about online stuff is that one really has no sense of 
what peoples' moods and feelings and similar are (one can't get a feel 
for what others are thinking or feeling, or how much of what they are 
saying means to them personally, or similar), so one can't really so 
much take them into consideration when responding to things. this isn't 
as much of an issue IRL, but not like much good happens IRL either.

however, one is often left to realize that far more often emotions, 
especially ones' own emotions, are a dangerous thing (as they are prone 
to jump to decisions, cause impulsive actions, and so on).

but, possibly, I wasn't really being all that careful, and emotions 
pulled a nasty trick and caused a regrettable result.

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

#6817 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

In article <iu1es8$439$1@news.albasani.net>, BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> 
wrote:

> On 6/23/2011 9:58 PM, Michael Press wrote:
> > In article<96evqmF46aU3@mid.individual.net>,
> >   blmblm@myrealbox.com<blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> In article<0.30901f4ebae96e49c2ff.20110622175451BST.8762nxdcx0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
> >> Ben Bacarisse<ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>  wrote:
> >>> BGB<cr88192@hotmail.com>  writes:
> >>
> >> [ snip ]
> >>
> >>>> or such...
> >>>
> >>> Eh?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Maybe you're making a different point, Ben, but this reminds me
> >> that I'm curious about that "or such" -- to me it doesn't seem like
> >> native-speaker-idiomatic English, and I'm mildly curious about whether
> >> it's idiomatic in some English I don't know, or perhaps a word-for-word
> >> translation of something idiomatic in another language.  BGB -- ?
> >
> > BGB chooses an idiomatic prose style.
> > I took him up once on it and was ignored.
> >
> 
> I vaguely remember something like this, but at the time I did not have 
> any good response, and it seemed like making a big fuss out of nothing, 
> and I also didn't really feel much like responding to what appeared to 
> be a personally directed attack.
> 
> I am well aware that my writing sucks, but it is slow and awkward to try 
> to write more properly, so this is usually reserved for writing things 
> like documentation and specifications and similar.
> 
> even then, things like writing papers or similar are something I tend to 
> do poorly at in classes (teachers don't much like my papers).
> 
> 
> I think my writing generally maps fairly well to what I think, so I 
> mostly write whatever it is I am thinking about, and try where possible 
> to avoid going off too much on random tangents (I am also prone to do 
> this as well, as chains of thought may go A->B->C and drift ever further 
> from the original topic, but on the upside, can often have multiple 
> parallel chains of thought, and seem at least acceptable at multitasking 
> and similar).
> 
> in terms of understanding things, I tend to understand everything fairly 
> literally, and tend to generally fail to see/understand things like 
> "implications" or "symbolism" or non-literal statements (I often just 
> see something that doesn't make much sense, and am usually like "oh 
> well, whatever", as it is often a lot of effort and guesswork to try to 
> figure out what was being written about).
> 
> 
> I am also not good with "principles" as often the principle bears 
> little/no resemblance to the text it is usually based on (so it is often 
> not clear what if anything the principle has to do with the input text).
> 
> 
> I think my thinking far more often involves the use of "templates", 
> where one has something in-mind which is similar to what they want, and 
> so then they can tweak it in-mind until it does what they want it to do.
> 
> granted, there are often relatively few good ways to summarize things 
> without making them no longer make sense, so describing something 
> effectively often requires lots of words (or including links to relevant 
> information and/or documents).
> 
> 
> I generally like programming though, as at least most 
> documentation/specs tend to make sense (usually far more sense than most 
> casual writing), and am also prone to reading a lot of stuff off of 
> wikis (one reads a wiki, gets distracted reading about various topics, 
> multiple hours go by, then one realizes that their hours have been used 
> up reading stuff off of a wiki).
> 
> I don't read much fiction though, nor all that many books in general.
> 
> I generally like online information, as then one can fetch whatever 
> information they need at the moment.
> 
> 
> granted, how this whole chain of events (in this thread) got in motion 
> was by me making a misguided value judgment over what peoples' 
> intentions were (whether or not I or anyone else was "correct" didn't 
> really seem like so much of an issue, as "correct" is very often more a 
> matter of perspective and interpretations and similar anyways, and 
> usually is more a matter of whether or not things can be made to work as 
> intended, so it was more the intentions involved which seemed relevant).
> 
> admittedly, I thought the OP was actually asking about a different issue 
> as well (namely, about how to deal with the socket blocking on a read 
> request when there was no input present).
> 
> 
> a difficult thing about online stuff is that one really has no sense of 
> what peoples' moods and feelings and similar are (one can't get a feel 
> for what others are thinking or feeling, or how much of what they are 
> saying means to them personally, or similar), so one can't really so 
> much take them into consideration when responding to things. this isn't 
> as much of an issue IRL, but not like much good happens IRL either.
> 
> however, one is often left to realize that far more often emotions, 
> especially ones' own emotions, are a dangerous thing (as they are prone 
> to jump to decisions, cause impulsive actions, and so on).
> 
> but, possibly, I wasn't really being all that careful, and emotions 
> pulled a nasty trick and caused a regrettable result.

This is all clear to me. Your train of thought is easy to follow,
and your prose well connected. 

If I may? Use standard English capitalization. Really, there is
no difference between writing a program that compiles, and
writing prose according to standards of grammar.

-- 
Michael Press

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

#6850 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

On 6/24/2011 3:07 AM, Michael Press wrote:
> In article<iu1es8$439$1@news.albasani.net>, BGB<cr88192@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 6/23/2011 9:58 PM, Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article<96evqmF46aU3@mid.individual.net>,
>>>    blmblm@myrealbox.com<blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article<0.30901f4ebae96e49c2ff.20110622175451BST.8762nxdcx0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
>>>> Ben Bacarisse<ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>   wrote:
>>>>> BGB<cr88192@hotmail.com>   writes:
>>>>
>>>> [ snip ]
>>>>
>>>>>> or such...
>>>>>
>>>>> Eh?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you're making a different point, Ben, but this reminds me
>>>> that I'm curious about that "or such" -- to me it doesn't seem like
>>>> native-speaker-idiomatic English, and I'm mildly curious about whether
>>>> it's idiomatic in some English I don't know, or perhaps a word-for-word
>>>> translation of something idiomatic in another language.  BGB -- ?
>>>
>>> BGB chooses an idiomatic prose style.
>>> I took him up once on it and was ignored.
>>>
>>
>> I vaguely remember something like this, but at the time I did not have
>> any good response, and it seemed like making a big fuss out of nothing,
>> and I also didn't really feel much like responding to what appeared to
>> be a personally directed attack.
>>
>> I am well aware that my writing sucks, but it is slow and awkward to try
>> to write more properly, so this is usually reserved for writing things
>> like documentation and specifications and similar.
>>
>> even then, things like writing papers or similar are something I tend to
>> do poorly at in classes (teachers don't much like my papers).
>>
>>
>> I think my writing generally maps fairly well to what I think, so I
>> mostly write whatever it is I am thinking about, and try where possible
>> to avoid going off too much on random tangents (I am also prone to do
>> this as well, as chains of thought may go A->B->C and drift ever further
>> from the original topic, but on the upside, can often have multiple
>> parallel chains of thought, and seem at least acceptable at multitasking
>> and similar).
>>
>> in terms of understanding things, I tend to understand everything fairly
>> literally, and tend to generally fail to see/understand things like
>> "implications" or "symbolism" or non-literal statements (I often just
>> see something that doesn't make much sense, and am usually like "oh
>> well, whatever", as it is often a lot of effort and guesswork to try to
>> figure out what was being written about).
>>
>>
>> I am also not good with "principles" as often the principle bears
>> little/no resemblance to the text it is usually based on (so it is often
>> not clear what if anything the principle has to do with the input text).
>>
>>
>> I think my thinking far more often involves the use of "templates",
>> where one has something in-mind which is similar to what they want, and
>> so then they can tweak it in-mind until it does what they want it to do.
>>
>> granted, there are often relatively few good ways to summarize things
>> without making them no longer make sense, so describing something
>> effectively often requires lots of words (or including links to relevant
>> information and/or documents).
>>
>>
>> I generally like programming though, as at least most
>> documentation/specs tend to make sense (usually far more sense than most
>> casual writing), and am also prone to reading a lot of stuff off of
>> wikis (one reads a wiki, gets distracted reading about various topics,
>> multiple hours go by, then one realizes that their hours have been used
>> up reading stuff off of a wiki).
>>
>> I don't read much fiction though, nor all that many books in general.
>>
>> I generally like online information, as then one can fetch whatever
>> information they need at the moment.
>>
>>
>> granted, how this whole chain of events (in this thread) got in motion
>> was by me making a misguided value judgment over what peoples'
>> intentions were (whether or not I or anyone else was "correct" didn't
>> really seem like so much of an issue, as "correct" is very often more a
>> matter of perspective and interpretations and similar anyways, and
>> usually is more a matter of whether or not things can be made to work as
>> intended, so it was more the intentions involved which seemed relevant).
>>
>> admittedly, I thought the OP was actually asking about a different issue
>> as well (namely, about how to deal with the socket blocking on a read
>> request when there was no input present).
>>
>>
>> a difficult thing about online stuff is that one really has no sense of
>> what peoples' moods and feelings and similar are (one can't get a feel
>> for what others are thinking or feeling, or how much of what they are
>> saying means to them personally, or similar), so one can't really so
>> much take them into consideration when responding to things. this isn't
>> as much of an issue IRL, but not like much good happens IRL either.
>>
>> however, one is often left to realize that far more often emotions,
>> especially ones' own emotions, are a dangerous thing (as they are prone
>> to jump to decisions, cause impulsive actions, and so on).
>>
>> but, possibly, I wasn't really being all that careful, and emotions
>> pulled a nasty trick and caused a regrettable result.
>
> This is all clear to me. Your train of thought is easy to follow,
> and your prose well connected.
>

don't know why it would be much easier than any of my other text, apart 
from at the moment me not writing about technical matters.


> If I may? Use standard English capitalization. Really, there is
> no difference between writing a program that compiles, and
> writing prose according to standards of grammar.
>

I usually only really use capitalization for documentation or similar, 
but not usually for usenet posts or emails.

partial reason I think is personal convention, as I have just never 
really capitalized these.

also, I don't do touch-typing either, but usually use a few fingers from 
each hand. shifting or similar requires placing a finger to hold down 
the shift while usually using the other hand for typing the letters or 
similar. although, on typing tests I can usually pull off 35-40 WPM not 
using touch-typing, which is usually good enough. touch-typing feels 
awkward and makes it harder to access numbers and symbols, vs using 2 or 
3 fingers from each hand which may move more freely. as a downside it 
does require a partial view of the keyboard mostly to maintain alignment 
and similar (but usually I mostly watch the screen and use peripheral 
vision for hand alignment and similar).


granted, I have my own conventions that people make fuss over sometimes, 
like always using forks (including for soups/cereal), and generally 
using knives for stirring things. then people make fuss over stuff like 
this, and I am like "well, whatever" since if the food gets eaten or the 
drink stirred, what does it matter which exact implement was used?

if one buys into all of this stuff, then it is also like society 
stealing ones' individuality, in much the same way that being forced 
into a dress code threatens to take away ones' individual identity.


or such...

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

#6856 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> writes:

> I usually only really use capitalization for documentation or similar,
> but not usually for usenet posts or emails.
>
> partial reason I think is personal convention, as I have just never
> really capitalized these.

Not capitalizing makes it harder to read.  People use capitalization to
parse sentences quickly and easily in one pass.

There's a lot of poorly written junk on Usenet that many people just
skip over.  Do you want your posts to be skipped over?  If not, make it
easy for your readers.  Your call.

-- Patrick

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

#6869 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

In article <86wrgb3wfi.fsf@zipcon.net>,
Patrick Scheible  <kkt@zipcon.net> wrote:
...
>skip over.  Do you want your posts to be skipped over?  If not, make it
>easy for your readers.  Your call.

He can probably live without (and in fact do just fine) those kind of
(idiot) people reading his stuff.

No loss.

-- 
Just for a change of pace, this sig is *not* an obscure reference to
comp.lang.c...

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

#6860 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

In article <iu2hub$ila$1@news.albasani.net>, BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> 
wrote:

> also, I don't do touch-typing either,

Here is a good place to learn. It is a straightforward
site without all the useless glitz. 
<http://www.typeonline.co.uk/>
There are many others.

Do a lessen each day. Repeat previous lessons as well.
Best to keep a constant pace. As my music teacher said,
"If you want to play it fast, you need to be able to
play it slow.

-- 
Michael Press

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

#6876 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

"BGB" <cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:iu2hub$ila$1@news.albasani.net...

> granted, I have my own conventions that people make fuss over sometimes,
> like always using forks (including for soups/cereal), and generally

They might have a point there; consuming liquids with a fork would be rather
futile for most people.

> using knives for stirring things.

After using forks for everything else, why break the pattern and not use one 
for stirring too? It would certainly simplify keeping your cutlery drawer in 
order.

-- 
Bartc 

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

#6864 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

On 2011-06-24, BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote:
> in terms of understanding things, I tend to understand everything fairly 
> literally, and tend to generally fail to see/understand things like 
> "implications" or "symbolism" or non-literal statements (I often just 
> see something that doesn't make much sense, and am usually like "oh 
> well, whatever", as it is often a lot of effort and guesswork to try to 
> figure out what was being written about).

> I am also not good with "principles" as often the principle bears 
> little/no resemblance to the text it is usually based on (so it is often 
> not clear what if anything the principle has to do with the input text).

This sounds autistic.  In fact, nearly all of what you wrote in this post
sounds autistic.  You may want to look into that.  Being autistic has its
ups and downs, but being a *diagnosed* autistic generally has many more
ups and many fewer downs.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2011, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.

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

#6870 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

On 6/24/2011 12:39 PM, Seebs wrote:
> On 2011-06-24, BGB<cr88192@hotmail.com>  wrote:
>> in terms of understanding things, I tend to understand everything fairly
>> literally, and tend to generally fail to see/understand things like
>> "implications" or "symbolism" or non-literal statements (I often just
>> see something that doesn't make much sense, and am usually like "oh
>> well, whatever", as it is often a lot of effort and guesswork to try to
>> figure out what was being written about).
>
>> I am also not good with "principles" as often the principle bears
>> little/no resemblance to the text it is usually based on (so it is often
>> not clear what if anything the principle has to do with the input text).
>
> This sounds autistic.  In fact, nearly all of what you wrote in this post
> sounds autistic.  You may want to look into that.  Being autistic has its
> ups and downs, but being a *diagnosed* autistic generally has many more
> ups and many fewer downs.
>

errm... I am already diagnosed as autistic (more specifically, as 
Aspergers).

however, if one doesn't mention it, often not that many people notice, 
but if a person does mention it, then people often overreact and treat 
oneself as if they are disabled / retarded / "special-needs" / ..., 
which is generally more of a hassle than it is worth.

much like mentioning that I am also ethnically partially Ashkenazi (in 
addition to being Scotch-Irish), which also has mixed results, as many 
people are not exactly favorable towards people with this ethnicity (one 
ethnicity is more neutral, the other has stereotypes of greedy 
troll-like investment bankers endlessly complaining about everything 
going on around them...).


or such...

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

#6906 — Re: OT "or such" (was Re: reading from a socket)

On 2011-06-24, BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote:
> errm... I am already diagnosed as autistic (more specifically, as 
> Aspergers).

Ahh, that's helpful!

> however, if one doesn't mention it, often not that many people notice, 
> but if a person does mention it, then people often overreact and treat 
> oneself as if they are disabled / retarded / "special-needs" / ..., 
> which is generally more of a hassle than it is worth.

Yeah, I've noticed.  I sometimes actually rely on this, because the sorts
of people who like to bully disabled people are likely to try to bully
me; I'm a not-very-confrontational person with an obvious disability.

This results in hilarity as they try to hurt my feelings by indicating that
they don't respect me.  :)

What I've found is that in groups like this, the people who reward
attempts to communicate them make more informed decisions if they know
I'm autistic, and the people who react badly are not usually people I
was going to communicate with successfully anyway.

> much like mentioning that I am also ethnically partially Ashkenazi (in 
> addition to being Scotch-Irish), which also has mixed results, as many 
> people are not exactly favorable towards people with this ethnicity (one 
> ethnicity is more neutral, the other has stereotypes of greedy 
> troll-like investment bankers endlessly complaining about everything 
> going on around them...).

I am sure that if we mixed the stereotypes enough, we could get something
truly awesome, like a belligerent drunk who frequently gets to the office
too late in the day to foreclose on little old ladies.  That would be
an AMAZING stereotype.  :)

-s
-- 
Copyright 2011, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.

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

#6658

"Steve Richter" <stephenrichter@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:111c4d04-4b72-4438-b1a2-e3bb14d9dc30@gv8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
> when a client reads from a socket, how does it know the server has
> completed sending and is itself currently blocking on a read from the
> client?
>
> I am writing a small ftp client in C for the IBM AS400 using the UNIX
> APIs. When the client code connects to the FTP server it reads back
> the initial welcome messages. My code reads from the server, gets
> some /r terminated messages. Reads again and gets more /r terminated
> welcome messages. Then reads a 3rd time and blocks because there is
> nothing more to read.  What in the socket protocol tells me the 3rd
> read is going to block?
>
> thanks,

Hello,

recv() might return 0 bytes.
You might also use signal(SIGALRM, ) and alarm() to catch a timeout
or you might use ioctl(Socket, FIONBIO, )

kind regards
Heiner 

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

#6700

"Heinrich Wolf" <invalid@invalid.invalid> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:ittjvv$puu$1@news.m-online.net...
>
> "Steve Richter" <stephenrichter@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:111c4d04-4b72-4438-b1a2-e3bb14d9dc30@gv8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>> when a client reads from a socket, how does it know the server has
>> completed sending and is itself currently blocking on a read from the
>> client?
>>
>> I am writing a small ftp client in C for the IBM AS400 using the UNIX
>> APIs. When the client code connects to the FTP server it reads back
>> the initial welcome messages. My code reads from the server, gets
>> some /r terminated messages. Reads again and gets more /r terminated

are you sure it is "\r"? Did you read RFC 959 or more recent one that
say how implement FTP?
there in RFC 959  i read
   Protocollo di Trasferimento File (FTP) segue le specifiche del protocollo
   Telnet per tutte le comunicazioni sulla connessione di controllo. Poiche' il
   linguaggio usato per comunicazioni Telnet puo' essere un opzione negoziata,
   tutti i riferimenti nelle seguenti due sezioni saranno al "linguaggio Telnet"
   e al corrispondente "codice end-of-line Telnet". Attualmente, questo
   significa NVT-ASCII e <CRLF>. Nessun'altra specifica al protocollo Telnet
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   verra' citata.
....
   COMANDI LOCALI DELL'UTENTE              AZIONI COINVOLTE

      ftp (host) multics<CR>         Connette all'host S, porta L,
                                     stabilendo connessioni di controllo.
                                     <---- 220 Servizio pronto <CRLF>.
      username Doe <CR>              USER Doe<CRLF>---->
                                     <---- 331 Nome utente valido,
                                               inserire la password<CRLF>.
      password mumble <CR>           PASS mumble<CRLF>---->
                                     <---- 230 Utente loggato<CRLF>.
      retrieve (tipo locale) ASCII<CR>
     (percorso locale) test 1 <CR>   FTP-utente apre file locale in ASCII.
     (for. pathname) test.pl1<CR>    RETR test.pl1<CRLF> ---->
                                     <---- 150 stato file okay;
                                           in apertura la connessione
                                           dati<CRLF>.
                                     Il server fa una connessione dati
                                     alla porta U.

                                     <---- 226 In chiusura la connessione dati,
                                         trasferimento file avvenuto con
                                         successo<CRLF>.
      type Image<CR>                 TYPE I<CRLF> ---->
                                     <---- 200 Comando OK<CRLF>
      store (tipo locale) image<CR>
     (percorso locale) file dump<CR> FTP-utente apre file locale in Image.
     (for.pathname) >udd>cn>fd<CR>   STOR >udd>cn>fd<CRLF> ---->
                                     <---- 550 Accesso non consentito<CRLF>
      terminate                      QUIT <CRLF> ---->
                                     Il server chiude tutte le
                                     connessioni.


i say this because for HTTP they use "\r\n"== 13, 10 as bytes for end
of line and without these chars i think is not possible comunicate.


>> welcome messages. Then reads a 3rd time and blocks because there is
>> nothing more to read.  What in the socket protocol tells me the 3rd
>> read is going to block?
>>
>> thanks,
>
> Hello,
>
> recv() might return 0 bytes.
> You might also use signal(SIGALRM, ) and alarm() to catch a timeout
> or you might use ioctl(Socket, FIONBIO, )
>
> kind regards
> Heiner

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

#7551

Can you put the source code of the application???
maybe I can help you

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

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

csiph-web