Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #122580 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-11-14 16:13 -0600 |
| Last post | 2017-11-20 10:39 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 450 — 38 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
"The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2017-11-14 16:13 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-14 15:19 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-15 09:10 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-15 15:02 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 07:08 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-15 15:15 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 09:09 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-15 16:16 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-15 15:32 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-15 15:32 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-15 21:45 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-15 10:40 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-15 11:13 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-15 12:18 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-15 12:29 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-15 13:06 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-16 10:37 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-15 14:07 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-15 21:47 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-15 13:32 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-15 17:27 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-15 19:13 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-16 01:09 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-16 11:42 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-16 13:52 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 05:12 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-16 14:58 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 06:39 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 06:44 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 07:46 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-16 21:08 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 02:44 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 05:27 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-16 15:13 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 07:55 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 11:11 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 03:40 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 15:44 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 15:30 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 17:27 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 07:55 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-17 10:48 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 11:28 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-17 11:54 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 12:20 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-16 14:18 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-16 16:40 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-16 16:43 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-16 18:43 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-16 23:40 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-17 20:52 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 00:07 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-17 00:27 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-16 16:35 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 00:53 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 09:44 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 10:38 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-17 23:47 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 11:20 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 16:26 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 15:50 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-11-17 07:55 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-18 14:28 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-11-18 10:10 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-18 18:35 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-11-18 11:47 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-18 20:35 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-18 12:53 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-18 22:26 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 00:11 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-18 18:07 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 11:01 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-19 11:57 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 20:17 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-19 12:54 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 21:02 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-19 21:12 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2017-11-18 16:51 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-11-18 14:07 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 12:41 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-11-19 07:59 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 17:38 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-11-19 13:10 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 22:30 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-11-19 15:33 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-11-19 21:58 -0700
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-20 06:53 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-20 10:18 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 08:44 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-20 10:22 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-20 19:25 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-18 20:52 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-18 13:07 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-19 01:40 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-18 19:12 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-19 03:54 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-19 06:56 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-19 15:42 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-19 07:45 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-20 17:08 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-18 21:45 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-19 01:17 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-19 22:05 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-19 11:25 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-18 21:54 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-19 21:44 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-11-19 16:50 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-19 23:56 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 23:18 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-11-19 22:43 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 09:06 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-20 10:45 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 12:25 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-20 11:52 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 13:19 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-20 13:23 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 16:22 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-20 15:48 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-20 16:31 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-20 04:10 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-11-20 01:00 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-19 21:23 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 20:41 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-19 23:12 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 22:37 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-19 23:52 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-20 11:18 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 12:34 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-20 03:56 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 13:36 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-20 05:19 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 16:37 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-20 14:31 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-20 07:14 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 16:54 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-11-20 08:05 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-20 11:18 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 20:11 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-20 14:27 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-20 11:40 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 22:17 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-21 09:01 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 22:21 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-21 10:37 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-20 09:36 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 20:14 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-11-20 12:18 -0700
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-20 11:33 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-20 11:48 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-20 16:26 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-20 19:10 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-21 09:53 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-21 03:42 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-21 13:18 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-21 04:49 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-21 15:49 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-21 07:41 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-21 12:39 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-22 08:20 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-21 12:33 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-21 15:58 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-21 16:41 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-22 01:01 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-22 14:21 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-22 01:50 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-22 14:57 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-22 18:31 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-22 10:58 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-22 20:50 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-22 13:04 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-11-22 13:09 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-24 06:24 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-11-21 20:01 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-22 10:00 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-22 11:03 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-22 12:38 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2017-11-22 11:50 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-22 15:18 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-22 13:19 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-22 15:47 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-22 16:04 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-22 16:45 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-22 12:08 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-11-22 10:02 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-22 21:56 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-22 20:22 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-22 21:59 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-22 21:15 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-11-22 13:37 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-22 22:04 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-23 18:25 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-23 18:16 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-23 10:27 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-11-23 12:50 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-23 09:18 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-23 09:15 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-23 12:48 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-23 22:18 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-24 09:38 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-22 21:00 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-22 13:40 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-22 22:24 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-22 15:18 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2017-11-23 02:34 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-22 13:45 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-22 14:34 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-23 18:16 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-23 10:23 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-23 12:13 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-23 09:30 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-23 02:21 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-23 13:49 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-23 16:07 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-23 16:03 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-24 09:09 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-24 08:02 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-23 11:26 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-23 11:37 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-23 19:56 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-23 12:07 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-23 20:31 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-23 12:38 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-23 19:32 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-24 08:34 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-23 20:24 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-24 06:34 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-24 20:05 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-24 11:57 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-24 04:25 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-24 13:02 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-24 07:31 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-11-24 13:32 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-24 14:05 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-25 12:03 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2017-11-25 00:23 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-25 00:41 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-25 00:58 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-11-24 20:28 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-25 02:36 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-25 02:53 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-11-24 22:42 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-11-25 10:34 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-25 17:13 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-11-25 13:32 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-25 10:38 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-25 19:17 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-26 08:43 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-25 19:46 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-25 11:14 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2017-11-22 08:44 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-22 03:19 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-22 09:45 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-22 15:52 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-11-20 12:14 -0700
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-20 16:45 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-20 17:12 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2017-11-20 13:14 +0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2017-11-19 22:38 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-19 18:43 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 18:07 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2017-11-19 10:38 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-19 22:30 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-11-19 14:22 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond ruben safir <ruben@mrbrklyn.com> - 2017-11-25 11:46 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-25 17:19 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-26 08:46 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-25 20:59 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-26 11:54 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-25 23:34 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-26 14:19 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-26 11:39 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-26 13:20 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-26 13:43 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-26 17:32 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-26 17:31 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-26 22:11 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-26 06:53 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 19:50 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 17:37 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 07:54 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 17:45 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-17 11:15 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-11-17 19:36 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-19 23:03 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 16:02 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 08:12 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-17 16:44 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 17:53 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-18 08:04 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 19:46 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-18 11:12 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 23:00 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-18 12:14 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 23:35 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-18 13:27 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-18 01:57 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-19 12:09 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-18 23:39 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-19 13:30 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-19 01:17 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-19 14:37 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-18 12:52 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-19 10:33 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-18 22:04 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-19 17:30 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 08:02 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-23 03:15 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 17:39 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 19:13 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 06:48 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-16 17:03 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 09:24 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 09:45 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-16 10:57 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-16 14:13 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-17 11:24 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-18 09:53 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-16 23:44 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-16 08:35 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2017-11-15 16:28 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-15 23:00 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-16 14:38 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-16 12:15 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-17 00:44 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-17 13:54 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 09:51 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-17 12:28 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-17 10:56 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-17 11:47 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-17 20:16 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-17 12:57 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-17 15:07 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-11-15 02:33 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-14 18:21 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 04:04 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 01:56 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 10:49 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 03:42 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-15 13:13 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-15 12:16 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-11-15 11:47 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 04:58 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-16 15:22 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 08:07 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-16 16:17 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 14:45 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 08:21 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-16 08:25 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 08:37 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-16 10:44 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 11:16 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 04:39 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-11-16 19:51 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 11:37 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 11:58 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-16 12:09 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-11-17 02:53 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-16 20:36 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 12:40 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-11-16 23:54 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2017-11-16 18:08 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-16 23:27 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-17 12:32 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2017-11-18 06:50 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-18 04:15 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-18 12:44 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 10:10 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-17 14:02 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2017-11-16 18:06 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-11-17 01:01 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2017-11-18 06:45 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-11-18 13:07 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2017-11-19 09:16 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-16 16:03 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2017-11-18 06:47 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-18 13:13 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-18 14:04 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-18 14:38 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-18 09:59 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-20 13:23 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 10:30 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-11-18 14:42 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-17 16:43 +1300
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-17 10:32 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 22:17 +0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-15 15:54 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-15 15:12 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-15 15:15 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-15 15:35 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-15 17:31 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-11-15 08:39 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-15 17:10 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-15 17:31 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-15 18:26 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-11-16 01:19 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-15 10:54 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-15 21:42 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-15 22:52 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-11-15 23:46 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-15 23:56 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-16 13:29 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 05:43 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-16 14:53 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 07:00 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-16 16:10 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-16 16:10 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 11:42 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-16 17:06 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 09:37 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-15 21:42 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-11-15 15:16 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-15 12:25 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-15 21:50 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-15 15:54 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-15 23:36 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-15 17:47 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-16 00:44 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-15 23:54 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-16 01:28 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-15 16:46 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-16 00:49 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-16 15:47 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-16 15:46 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-16 17:26 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 17:14 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 13:34 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 11:56 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2017-11-16 15:19 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-16 13:50 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2017-11-16 18:11 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-16 00:49 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 02:06 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-11-16 15:43 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 16:01 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-11-15 16:21 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-15 22:24 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-11-16 16:01 +0100
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-16 11:54 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 14:54 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2017-11-16 21:20 +0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Jens Stuckelberger <Jens_Stuckelberger@nowhere.net> - 2017-11-15 15:17 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-15 12:31 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2017-11-15 16:07 +0000
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 11:08 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-15 14:28 -0500
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 12:31 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2017-11-15 16:28 -0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2017-11-19 15:38 -0600
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2017-11-20 12:55 +0800
Re: "The long goodbye to C" by Eric Raymond "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-11-20 10:39 -0500
Page 10 of 23 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 23 Next page →
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 16:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <gehRB.43977$X11.19172@fx20.am4> |
| In reply to | #123297 |
On 22/11/2017 14:47, David Brown wrote: > On 22/11/17 14:19, bartc wrote: > C is not "more aesthetic" than C++. From what I have seen, neither is > your language. How readable and understandable code is depends on the > experience and knowledge of the reader, and the abilities and style of > the writer - the actual language is of little relevance. Really? By that measure, we might as well all be programming in assembly languages, as all we need is the requisite experience and knowledge. The actual language DOES make a difference. -- bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 16:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <AQhRB.69183$2W2.36073@fx38.iad> |
| In reply to | #123308 |
bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >On 22/11/2017 14:47, David Brown wrote: >> On 22/11/17 14:19, bartc wrote: > >> C is not "more aesthetic" than C++. From what I have seen, neither is >> your language. How readable and understandable code is depends on the >> experience and knowledge of the reader, and the abilities and style of >> the writer - the actual language is of little relevance. > >Really? > Yes. >By that measure, we might as well all be programming in assembly >languages, as all we need is the requisite experience and knowledge. Non sequitur. > >The actual language DOES make a difference. Not in readability. COBOL is readable if written in a certain style. Assembler is readable given sufficient comments. BASIC is readable to one accustomed to the language. APL, perhaps is an exception. Perl code is not readable by the programmer who wrote it (that's what makes it a write-only language).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 12:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <05aab223-c759-7c0b-1149-fe7876d2bd35@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #123313 |
On 11/22/2017 11:45 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: ... >> The actual language DOES make a difference. > > Not in readability. COBOL is readable if written in a certain > style. Assembler is readable given sufficient comments. BASIC > is readable to one accustomed to the language. > > APL, perhaps is an exception. Perl code is not readable by the programmer > who wrote it (that's what makes it a write-only language). I learned APL in the late 1970's, and loved it. The way it works was a good fit to the way I thought about programming. At a time when IBM manuals had a reputation for impenetrability, I did a single pass through the IBM manual for APL and was writing working APL code shortly afterwards. Some of the APL code I wrote at that time got saved in box that I didn't look at again until two decades later. I hadn't written any APL code since the early 1980's. Despite that, I found my APL code perfectly readable, though writing new code would have required a lot of review. I can understand APL's reputation for unread-ability - but how did perl get such a reputation? I haven't written anywhere near as much perl as I have C, but most of the perl code I work with isn't particularly difficult to read. It strongly resembles C code, and isn't significantly more difficult to read than typical C code
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 10:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9b317f33-62b4-40f7-b3dc-9f44c6c9a65d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #123316 |
On Wednesday, 22 November 2017 19:08:53 UTC+2, James R. Kuyper wrote: > > I can understand APL's reputation for unread-ability - but how did perl > get such a reputation? I haven't written anywhere near as much perl as I > have C, but most of the perl code I work with isn't particularly > difficult to read. It strongly resembles C code, and isn't significantly > more difficult to read than typical C code Perl is bad because when someone mentions Perl then there is big probability that someone starts to complain about its numerous pitfalls (for example that subroutine calls are slow) and then someone else starts to complain about complainers and so on and that too often results with useful conversation being stopped. ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 21:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ov4o9l$tbt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #123316 |
On 22/11/17 18:08, James R. Kuyper wrote: > On 11/22/2017 11:45 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > ... >>> The actual language DOES make a difference. >> >> Not in readability. COBOL is readable if written in a certain >> style. Assembler is readable given sufficient comments. BASIC >> is readable to one accustomed to the language. >> >> APL, perhaps is an exception. Perl code is not readable by the >> programmer >> who wrote it (that's what makes it a write-only language). > > I learned APL in the late 1970's, and loved it. The way it works was a > good fit to the way I thought about programming. At a time when IBM > manuals had a reputation for impenetrability, I did a single pass > through the IBM manual for APL and was writing working APL code shortly > afterwards. > Some of the APL code I wrote at that time got saved in box that I didn't > look at again until two decades later. I hadn't written any APL code > since the early 1980's. Despite that, I found my APL code perfectly > readable, though writing new code would have required a lot of review. > > I can understand APL's reputation for unread-ability - but how did perl > get such a reputation? I haven't written anywhere near as much perl as I > have C, but most of the perl code I work with isn't particularly > difficult to read. It strongly resembles C code, and isn't significantly > more difficult to read than typical C code > Perl's reputation is much exaggerated. Like most languages, you can write good, clear Perl code. But Perl is often used for short scripts - the kind of thing people write quickly and don't intend to last for long. Such code is often full of shortcuts (my Perl experience is minimal, but I believe there are shortcuts for things like "the result of the last expression"), single letter variables, and other things that were obvious when the code was written, but are less understandable a couple of days later.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 20:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <h0lRB.173971$Ts.135631@fx40.am4> |
| In reply to | #123313 |
On 22/11/2017 16:45, Scott Lurndal wrote: > bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >> On 22/11/2017 14:47, David Brown wrote: >>> On 22/11/17 14:19, bartc wrote: >> >>> C is not "more aesthetic" than C++. From what I have seen, neither is >>> your language. How readable and understandable code is depends on the >>> experience and knowledge of the reader, and the abilities and style of >>> the writer - the actual language is of little relevance. >> >> Really? >> > > Yes. > >> By that measure, we might as well all be programming in assembly >> languages, as all we need is the requisite experience and knowledge. > > Non sequitur. > >> >> The actual language DOES make a difference. > > Not in readability. COBOL is readable if written in a certain > style. Assembler is readable given sufficient comments. BASIC > is readable to one accustomed to the language. Sorry, but assembly code beyond small fragments is unreadable even with comments. Unless the comments contain a HLL representation of the code, but that is not useful for maintenance or development (and actually hinder it). There are good reasons why some use HLAs instead, or use proper HLLs. IMO, structured programs with clean syntax are the most readable. Any language can written poorly but when you have a cluttered, 'busy' syntax as a starting point, that doesn't help. Example: length of a fixed length array A: C: sizeof(A)/sizeof(A[0]) Other: A.len # Or len(A), A'len etc. To me, this is a no-brainer; why would ANYONE prefer C's cluttered version, and where the array name has to be written twice? Some in C might use this: #define LEN(A) (sizeof(A)/sizeof(A[0])) But this is just admitting that the sizeof/sizeof idiom is a right pain and something better is needed and should be standard. This is just a detail, but a detail could have been trivially fixed (at pretty any time in the last 4-5 decades) and would have benefited everyone. A language that completely dismisses low-hanging fruit like this is not doing anyone any favours. sizeof(arrayname1)/sizeof(arrayname2[0]) will just obscure the actual code and increase the chances of errors. -- bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 21:59 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ov4ofr$um7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #123325 |
On 22/11/17 21:22, bartc wrote: > On 22/11/2017 16:45, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >>> On 22/11/2017 14:47, David Brown wrote: >>>> On 22/11/17 14:19, bartc wrote: >>> >>>> C is not "more aesthetic" than C++. From what I have seen, neither is >>>> your language. How readable and understandable code is depends on the >>>> experience and knowledge of the reader, and the abilities and style of >>>> the writer - the actual language is of little relevance. >>> >>> Really? >>> >> >> Yes. >> >>> By that measure, we might as well all be programming in assembly >>> languages, as all we need is the requisite experience and knowledge. >> >> Non sequitur. >> >>> >>> The actual language DOES make a difference. >> >> Not in readability. COBOL is readable if written in a certain >> style. Assembler is readable given sufficient comments. BASIC >> is readable to one accustomed to the language. > > Sorry, but assembly code beyond small fragments is unreadable even with > comments. Unless the comments contain a HLL representation of the code, > but that is not useful for maintenance or development (and actually > hinder it). > > There are good reasons why some use HLAs instead, or use proper HLLs. > > IMO, structured programs with clean syntax are the most readable. Any > language can written poorly but when you have a cluttered, 'busy' syntax > as a starting point, that doesn't help. > > Example: length of a fixed length array A: > > C: sizeof(A)/sizeof(A[0]) > > Other: A.len # Or len(A), A'len etc. > > To me, this is a no-brainer; why would ANYONE prefer C's cluttered > version, and where the array name has to be written twice? > > Some in C might use this: > > #define LEN(A) (sizeof(A)/sizeof(A[0])) > > But this is just admitting that the sizeof/sizeof idiom is a right pain > and something better is needed and should be standard. > > This is just a detail, but a detail could have been trivially fixed (at > pretty any time in the last 4-5 decades) and would have benefited > everyone. A language that completely dismisses low-hanging fruit like > this is not doing anyone any favours. > > sizeof(arrayname1)/sizeof(arrayname2[0]) will just obscure the actual > code and increase the chances of errors. > Yes, and /clearly/ C++'s method "A.size()" is the least readable and understandable of any language. That one example proves that C++ is "less aesthetic" than C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 21:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <VNlRB.81258$WQ.37935@fx10.am4> |
| In reply to | #123328 |
On 22/11/2017 20:59, David Brown wrote: > On 22/11/17 21:22, bartc wrote: > Yes, and /clearly/ C++'s method "A.size()" is the least readable and > understandable of any language. That one example proves that C++ is > "less aesthetic" than C. What does A.size() return? Bear in mind that this language also supports sizeof(A). I'm not disputing that C++ has tidied up a few things, but I'm not into classes or inheritance or templates or any of that stuff, and I don't want a compiler that is preoccupied with all that. However, I tried this code on godbolt: int A[10]; A.size(); and if failed. Perhaps .size() only works on special arrays for which a .size method has been provided? (But I tried it on vectors, and it failed too; I don't know how to get it to show actual error messages.) -- bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 13:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8360c970-04da-42ca-aee3-1c8a88acb509@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #123332 |
On Wednesday, 22 November 2017 23:15:42 UTC+2, Bart wrote:
> On 22/11/2017 20:59, David Brown wrote:
> > On 22/11/17 21:22, bartc wrote:
>
> > Yes, and /clearly/ C++'s method "A.size()" is the least readable and
> > understandable of any language. That one example proves that C++ is
> > "less aesthetic" than C.
>
> What does A.size() return? Bear in mind that this language also supports
> sizeof(A).
>
> I'm not disputing that C++ has tidied up a few things, but I'm not into
> classes or inheritance or templates or any of that stuff, and I don't
> want a compiler that is preoccupied with all that.
>
> However, I tried this code on godbolt:
>
> int A[10];
>
> A.size();
>
> and if failed. Perhaps .size() only works on special arrays for which a
> .size method has been provided? (But I tried it on vectors, and it
> failed too; I don't know how to get it to show actual error messages.)
Yes, there have been very lot of complaints about C array being not
assignable nor passable nor returnable ... and so C++ has added
template of array class to standard library. It is very thin wrapper
around raw array:
#include <iostream>
#include <array>
int main()
{
std::array<int,10> A;
std::cout << "A.size() is " << A.size() << "\n";
std::cout << "sizeof A is " << sizeof A << "\n";
}
Rssult of it is that:
A.size() is 10
sizeof A is 40
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 22:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <KvmRB.14717$by1.3758@fx24.am4> |
| In reply to | #123333 |
On 22/11/2017 21:37, Öö Tiib wrote:
> On Wednesday, 22 November 2017 23:15:42 UTC+2, Bart wrote:
>> However, I tried this code on godbolt:
>>
>> int A[10];
>>
>> A.size();
>>
>> and if failed. Perhaps .size() only works on special arrays for which a
>> .size method has been provided? (But I tried it on vectors, and it
>> failed too; I don't know how to get it to show actual error messages.)
>
> Yes, there have been very lot of complaints about C array being not
> assignable nor passable nor returnable ... and so C++ has added
> template of array class to standard library. It is very thin wrapper
> around raw array:
>
> #include <iostream>
> #include <array>
>
> int main()
> {
> std::array<int,10> A;
> std::cout << "A.size() is " << A.size() << "\n";
> std::cout << "sizeof A is " << sizeof A << "\n";
> }
>
> Rssult of it is that:
>
> A.size() is 10
> sizeof A is 40
OK, thanks (I think I was using vector<int> A[10]; or something).
Apparently .size() returns the length, not the size in bytes, which is a
tad confusing. And it doesn't work on built-in arrays, which means it
hasn't taken care of the sizeof/sizeof thing at all.
So the untidiness of the language shows through even with this glimpse
of a corner of the language.
--
bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-23 18:25 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <f7n4erF1omrU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #123337 |
On 11/23/2017 11:04 AM, bartc wrote:
> On 22/11/2017 21:37, Öö Tiib wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 22 November 2017 23:15:42 UTC+2, Bart wrote:
>
>>> However, I tried this code on godbolt:
>>>
>>> int A[10];
>>>
>>> A.size();
>>>
>>> and if failed. Perhaps .size() only works on special arrays for which a
>>> .size method has been provided? (But I tried it on vectors, and it
>>> failed too; I don't know how to get it to show actual error messages.)
>>
>> Yes, there have been very lot of complaints about C array being not
>> assignable nor passable nor returnable ... and so C++ has added
>> template of array class to standard library. It is very thin wrapper
>> around raw array:
>>
>> #include <iostream>
>> #include <array>
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>> std::array<int,10> A;
>> std::cout << "A.size() is " << A.size() << "\n";
>> std::cout << "sizeof A is " << sizeof A << "\n";
>> }
>>
>> Rssult of it is that:
>>
>> A.size() is 10
>> sizeof A is 40
>
> OK, thanks (I think I was using vector<int> A[10]; or something).
There you go again, fumbling away in the dark and then whinging when
your random attempt fails to build..
> Apparently .size() returns the length, not the size in bytes, which is a
> tad confusing. And it doesn't work on built-in arrays, which means it
> hasn't taken care of the sizeof/sizeof thing at all.
Which is more useful? How often do you need (or care about) the size in
bytes?
> So the untidiness of the language shows through even with this glimpse
> of a corner of the language.
A glimpse with your eyes shut...
--
Ian.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-23 18:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sfERB.79459$Jw1.58894@fx17.am4> |
| In reply to | #123353 |
On 23/11/2017 05:25, Ian Collins wrote:
> On 11/23/2017 11:04 AM, bartc wrote:
>> Apparently .size() returns the length, not the size in bytes, which is a
>> tad confusing.
> Which is more useful? How often do you need (or care about) the size in
> bytes?
I'm saying the name 'size' is confusing, especially as 'sizeof' /in the
same language/ means the size in bytes.
Would it have hurt to have called it 'length' instead?
>> So the untidiness of the language shows through even with this glimpse
>> of a corner of the language.
>
> A glimpse with your eyes shut...
#include <vector>
#include <array>
std::vector<int> v = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
std::array<int, 6> v = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
Here's more: why does <int, 6> work for arrays but not vectors?
(It gives an error on godbolt.)
--
bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-23 10:27 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <752a8480-10cd-4bc2-8b6c-5a2f528734f7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #123384 |
On Thursday, November 23, 2017 at 4:16:11 PM UTC-2, Bart wrote:
...
> #include <vector>
> #include <array>
>
> std::vector<int> v = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
> std::array<int, 6> v = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
>
> Here's more: why does <int, 6> work for arrays but not vectors?
The size 6 is a compile time constant in std::array<int, 6>.
Like int data[6];
std::vector will not need this constant, because it's size change in
runtime.
If you want to initialize vector with the value 6 for instance,
using an similar syntax like:
std::vector<int, 6> v ;
would be a bad idea because the 6 is a different type from other number.
The 6 is part of the type.
This is what C++ programmers do:
std::vector<int> v;
v.reserve(6);
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-23 12:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2d83662c-fa18-4fe2-af41-85003e218e88@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #123384 |
On Thursday, 23 November 2017 20:16:11 UTC+2, Bart wrote:
> On 23/11/2017 05:25, Ian Collins wrote:
> > On 11/23/2017 11:04 AM, bartc wrote:
>
> >> Apparently .size() returns the length, not the size in bytes, which is a
> >> tad confusing.
>
> > Which is more useful? How often do you need (or care about) the size in
> > bytes?
>
> I'm saying the name 'size' is confusing, especially as 'sizeof' /in the
> same language/ means the size in bytes.
Consistency of naming is more important than preciseness. For novice it
is easier to remember that every C++ standard library container reports
its count of elements with member function size() than to look up every
time what "more intuitive name" like element_count(), length(),
number_of_elements() was used this time by Mr. Architect.
Alexander Stepanov (who wrote std::vector and several other
containers in nineties) did choose "size". Later others like
Nicolai M. Josuttis (who wrote std::array) kept using same name.
C++17 adds std::size template to get length of any container
including raw array:
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <iterator>
int main()
{
std::vector<double> v = { 3., 1., 4. };
std::cout << "Vector v contains " << std::size(v) << " elements.\n";
int a[] = { -5, 10, 15 };
std::cout << "Array a contains " << std::size(a) << " elements.\n";
}
Result:
Vector v contains 3 elements.
Array a contains 3 elements.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-23 09:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ov608v$6on$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #123337 |
On 22/11/17 23:04, bartc wrote:
> On 22/11/2017 21:37, Öö Tiib wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 22 November 2017 23:15:42 UTC+2, Bart wrote:
>
>>> However, I tried this code on godbolt:
>>>
>>> int A[10];
>>>
>>> A.size();
>>>
>>> and if failed. Perhaps .size() only works on special arrays for which a
>>> .size method has been provided? (But I tried it on vectors, and it
>>> failed too; I don't know how to get it to show actual error messages.)
>>
>> Yes, there have been very lot of complaints about C array being not
>> assignable nor passable nor returnable ... and so C++ has added
>> template of array class to standard library. It is very thin wrapper
>> around raw array:
>>
>> #include <iostream>
>> #include <array>
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>> std::array<int,10> A;
>> std::cout << "A.size() is " << A.size() << "\n";
>> std::cout << "sizeof A is " << sizeof A << "\n";
>> }
>>
>> Rssult of it is that:
>>
>> A.size() is 10
>> sizeof A is 40
>
> OK, thanks (I think I was using vector<int> A[10]; or something).
That would be an array of 10 vectors of int.
>
> Apparently .size() returns the length, not the size in bytes, which is a
> tad confusing.
I thought the whole point was to get the length of the array/vector, not
its size in bytes!
> And it doesn't work on built-in arrays, which means it
> hasn't taken care of the sizeof/sizeof thing at all.
>
> So the untidiness of the language shows through even with this glimpse
> of a corner of the language.
>
I think it is fair to say you don't have the knowledge and experience of
C++ to make this kind of judgement.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-23 09:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ov602q$5on$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #123332 |
On 22/11/17 22:15, bartc wrote:
> On 22/11/2017 20:59, David Brown wrote:
>> On 22/11/17 21:22, bartc wrote:
>
>> Yes, and /clearly/ C++'s method "A.size()" is the least readable and
>> understandable of any language. That one example proves that C++ is
>> "less aesthetic" than C.
>
> What does A.size() return? Bear in mind that this language also supports
> sizeof(A).
A.size() returns the number of elements in a container A. sizeof(A)
does the same as it always has - it gives the number of bytes taken by
the structure/class A. Often sizeof() will be much smaller than
.size(), since the container object will have pointers to linked lists
and dynamic memory that holds the actual data. So .size() gives you
what you actually /want/ in most cases, rather than the low-level
primitive of the memory space taken.
I can understand that you need to learn something here, or look it up -
after all, there are many ways to view the "size" of a container (the
memory taken up, the number of elements in the container, the number of
elements the container /could/ hold). But it is easy once you have got
it, and the code is clear and neat.
And in C++ (at least from C++11 onwards) you don't need "size()" much
anyway - you don't need it to iterate over the container A, for example:
for (auto a : A) { ... }
>
> I'm not disputing that C++ has tidied up a few things, but I'm not into
> classes or inheritance or templates or any of that stuff, and I don't
> want a compiler that is preoccupied with all that.
Your C++ compiler will handle as many classes and templates as you give
it. If you write C++ code without classes and templates, it will not be
"preoccupied" with them (except in the sense that a standard C struct is
technically a class in C++). Use the features you want.
>
> However, I tried this code on godbolt:
>
> int A[10];
>
> A.size();
>
> and if failed. Perhaps .size() only works on special arrays for which a
> .size method has been provided?
Exactly. C arrays are the same as they always have been in C++. C++
has array classes, which are safer than C arrays in that the size of the
array is part of the type, and they are passed by value (unless you
/choose/ to pass pointers or references) - these have a .size() method.
C++ array classes are not quite "perfect" - at least not yet. There is
a little too much manual work for my taste, there is no variant with
run-time size (the size in this case could not be part of the type,
obviously), and it is missing "constexpr" in useful places that stop you
being able to use them in constexpr functions.
> (But I tried it on vectors, and it
> failed too; I don't know how to get it to show actual error messages.)
>
Click the warning triangle symbol to show the error window.
I don't know how you failed to get the vector .size() to work.
#include <vector>
#include <array>
int vecttest(void) {
std::vector<int> v = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
return v.size();
}
int arrtest(void) {
std::array<int, 6> v = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
return v.size();
}
template <typename T, size_t S>
inline size_t arraysize(const T (&v)[S]) { (void) v; return S; }
int carrtest(void) {
int v[] = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
return arraysize(v);
}
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-23 12:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lnine0soum.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #123354 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
> On 22/11/17 22:15, bartc wrote:
>> On 22/11/2017 20:59, David Brown wrote:
>>> On 22/11/17 21:22, bartc wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, and /clearly/ C++'s method "A.size()" is the least readable and
>>> understandable of any language. That one example proves that C++ is
>>> "less aesthetic" than C.
>>
>> What does A.size() return? Bear in mind that this language also supports
>> sizeof(A).
>
> A.size() returns the number of elements in a container A. sizeof(A)
> does the same as it always has - it gives the number of bytes taken by
> the structure/class A.
[snip]
David, perhaps you could direct bartc to a good C++ tutorial rather than
discussing C++ features at length on comp.lang.c.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-23 22:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <AOHRB.41485$Gc2.4309@fx13.am4> |
| In reply to | #123404 |
On 23/11/2017 20:48, Keith Thompson wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: >> On 22/11/17 22:15, bartc wrote: >>> On 22/11/2017 20:59, David Brown wrote: >>>> On 22/11/17 21:22, bartc wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, and /clearly/ C++'s method "A.size()" is the least readable and >>>> understandable of any language. That one example proves that C++ is >>>> "less aesthetic" than C. >>> >>> What does A.size() return? Bear in mind that this language also supports >>> sizeof(A). >> >> A.size() returns the number of elements in a container A. sizeof(A) >> does the same as it always has - it gives the number of bytes taken by >> the structure/class A. > [snip] > > David, perhaps you could direct bartc to a good C++ tutorial rather than > discussing C++ features at length on comp.lang.c. Why are you assuming I'm interested in C++? (I looked at it in the 90s and was turned off even then.) The subject of the sizeof(a)/sizeof(a[0]) idiom came up and David offered 'A.size()' from C++; I merely asked him to clarify what it did. David tends to give in-depth replies. -- bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-24 09:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ov8lqo$tls$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #123404 |
On 23/11/17 21:48, Keith Thompson wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: >> On 22/11/17 22:15, bartc wrote: >>> On 22/11/2017 20:59, David Brown wrote: >>>> On 22/11/17 21:22, bartc wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, and /clearly/ C++'s method "A.size()" is the least readable and >>>> understandable of any language. That one example proves that C++ is >>>> "less aesthetic" than C. >>> >>> What does A.size() return? Bear in mind that this language also supports >>> sizeof(A). >> >> A.size() returns the number of elements in a container A. sizeof(A) >> does the same as it always has - it gives the number of bytes taken by >> the structure/class A. > [snip] > > David, perhaps you could direct bartc to a good C++ tutorial rather than > discussing C++ features at length on comp.lang.c. > The C++ stuff was just for comparison - this thread is already discussing comparisons with different languages (possible changes to C, Bart's own languages, C++, and others). I have no plans to teach Bart C++, I was merely showing him a little of what it can do and pointing out that if he feels things like a "array size" are missing from C, he could easily move to C++. If things get too in-depth C++, we could move to comp.lang.c++ - but I suspect it would be better just to end that branch of the thread.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-11-22 21:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <JzlRB.81276$XT.63127@fx37.am4> |
| In reply to | #123325 |
On 22/11/2017 20:22, bartc wrote: > Example: length of a fixed length array A: > > C: sizeof(A)/sizeof(A[0]) > > Other: A.len # Or len(A), A'len etc. > > To me, this is a no-brainer; why would ANYONE prefer C's cluttered > version, and where the array name has to be written twice? > > Some in C might use this: > > #define LEN(A) (sizeof(A)/sizeof(A[0])) > > But this is just admitting that the sizeof/sizeof idiom is a right pain > and something better is needed and should be standard. > > This is just a detail, but a detail could have been trivially fixed (at > pretty any time in the last 4-5 decades) and would have benefited > everyone. A language that completely dismisses low-hanging fruit like > this is not doing anyone any favours. A language committee I mean. Out of interest, I modified my C compiler add a len() operator, which works like sizeof, but returns the length of an array, for either a type or expression. It took less than ten minutes (although I omitted checking that the type is actually an array; if not then it just returns 0, although 1 is another possibility). I added it as both len() and lengthof() to see which I liked best, although of course adding reserved words like this is usually a no-no and you'd end up - if this was actually added - as something like _Lengthof(). So, for getting on for 50 years, a million programmers have spent much of their careers having to type sizeof(whatever)/sizeof(whatever[0]) for really no reason at all. It's staggering. -- Bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 10 of 23 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 23 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web