Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #124080 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-12-09 16:20 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-12-24 21:04 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 320 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-09 16:20 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-10 00:31 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? gordonb.k2333@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2017-12-09 20:40 -0600
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 02:21 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-10 11:50 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 04:19 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 04:32 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 04:43 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 05:03 -0800
Who's a troll now? (Was: Auto-execute code at exit?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-12-10 14:01 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-11 15:19 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 15:46 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 08:04 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 18:35 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 11:09 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 20:28 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 12:38 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:07 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 11:45 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 13:50 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 19:29 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-13 08:52 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 23:04 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 21:08 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 21:40 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 23:22 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-12 15:54 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 00:11 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 17:38 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 10:44 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-13 03:12 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 10:16 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-12 09:35 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 20:42 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:02 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-12 21:34 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-11 18:37 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2017-12-11 19:39 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gordon Burditt <gordon@hammy.burditt.org> - 2017-12-12 20:54 -0600
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-12-09 19:32 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-10 13:36 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-09 17:14 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-12-09 21:49 -0700
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-12-10 11:04 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 20:22 +0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-10 18:10 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-10 20:48 +0000
Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-10 10:59 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-10 20:37 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-12-10 15:58 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-10 22:59 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-11 02:34 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 15:33 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-11 16:42 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 15:52 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-12-11 15:53 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-12-11 17:09 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 08:18 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-12-11 19:04 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 08:19 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 17:26 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 09:40 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 18:09 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 11:07 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 20:18 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 12:27 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-12-11 13:42 -0700
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 12:54 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-12-11 19:34 -0700
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-11 17:46 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-11 19:31 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 18:48 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:36 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-12-11 18:49 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-11 20:33 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 12:39 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-11 21:22 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 13:25 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 05:45 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 21:00 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-11 13:13 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 21:45 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-12 10:46 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-11 14:04 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 05:42 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-11 13:53 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-11 21:21 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 21:53 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 08:01 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 18:00 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 11:01 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 20:44 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 12:52 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 21:16 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 13:24 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:55 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2017-12-11 22:00 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 21:43 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:52 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-11 21:41 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 22:33 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-12 01:17 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 01:44 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 10:01 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 11:17 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-12 03:40 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 12:01 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-12 04:50 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 18:33 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 10:37 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-12-12 21:43 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-12 11:31 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-12 20:09 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 13:56 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-12 19:44 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-13 09:07 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 23:28 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 00:08 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2017-12-13 01:42 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-13 16:35 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 10:55 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-13 11:04 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-12-13 11:45 -0600
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 13:36 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-14 07:34 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-13 03:20 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 11:25 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 11:50 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 14:27 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 14:31 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 16:56 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 19:27 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 21:15 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 22:48 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-14 07:44 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-14 06:55 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-14 00:32 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-15 00:01 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-15 00:48 -0800
Why post to Usenet? (Was: Auto-execute code at exit?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2017-12-15 10:51 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-15 12:18 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-15 17:40 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-15 20:12 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2017-12-15 12:54 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-15 13:51 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-16 14:46 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-15 23:20 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-16 00:36 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-16 01:34 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2017-12-16 20:06 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-17 17:33 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-17 21:35 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-17 15:06 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-18 12:41 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-12-18 03:36 -0600
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 11:51 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 12:02 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 12:43 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 15:07 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 16:07 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 20:50 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 13:57 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 15:36 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 21:04 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 09:08 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 20:51 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-18 15:37 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 16:28 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 10:59 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 19:35 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 19:55 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-18 20:48 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-18 13:03 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-18 21:14 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 00:08 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 16:58 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 01:28 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-19 14:35 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 01:45 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-19 01:49 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 02:54 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-19 14:45 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-19 07:48 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 16:00 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-19 17:42 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-19 17:19 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-19 09:43 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-12-19 18:57 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-19 09:33 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 18:34 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-19 11:05 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2017-12-18 21:09 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-18 20:38 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-19 13:35 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 01:00 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-19 14:04 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-20 13:42 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-20 15:52 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-20 15:42 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-20 08:16 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-20 18:25 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-20 10:48 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-20 20:43 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-20 12:44 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-21 15:18 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-21 09:45 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-21 20:08 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-21 12:33 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-21 22:42 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-21 15:20 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-22 09:57 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-22 08:21 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-23 13:32 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-23 19:35 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-26 12:08 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-26 12:36 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-27 10:38 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-27 08:14 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-12-27 09:50 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-20 12:12 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-20 18:16 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-20 19:41 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-20 22:52 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-20 15:39 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-21 13:02 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-21 00:50 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-20 18:22 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-21 12:10 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-21 13:10 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-21 20:55 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-21 21:37 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-22 01:50 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 12:14 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-22 17:01 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 17:34 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-22 09:52 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-22 12:02 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 20:18 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-22 12:39 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 23:10 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-22 17:05 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-23 02:17 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-12-22 22:14 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-23 14:43 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-23 14:31 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-24 09:45 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-23 16:28 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-23 11:23 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2017-12-23 13:24 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-24 09:29 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-21 20:57 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-21 13:11 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-21 21:58 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-12-21 14:03 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 01:34 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-12-22 07:55 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-22 16:41 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-12-22 12:46 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-23 11:57 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-12-23 08:12 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-23 21:02 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-12-23 16:13 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-23 22:15 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-23 14:45 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-23 15:47 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-12-23 19:34 -0500
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-24 12:08 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-24 12:11 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-24 12:17 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-12-24 05:49 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-24 13:06 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-23 13:51 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-23 22:17 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-22 18:37 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-22 19:03 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-20 17:44 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 17:22 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 01:41 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-19 09:54 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-19 13:24 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-19 14:43 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-19 09:02 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2017-12-18 20:58 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 22:36 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-18 20:37 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 09:13 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-18 20:51 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 09:03 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-18 19:13 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-18 11:28 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-18 10:07 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-12-18 07:50 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-12-16 12:21 +1300
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-15 09:51 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-14 12:08 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-14 05:13 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-12-13 09:21 -0700
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 19:27 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-13 15:14 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-13 17:11 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-13 00:29 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2017-12-13 00:41 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-14 06:51 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-14 14:40 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-12-14 17:15 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-14 18:59 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-12-12 09:48 +0100
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-12-11 17:40 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-12-11 10:57 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 13:56 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 14:09 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-10 14:18 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2017-12-10 14:51 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2017-12-23 11:08 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2017-12-25 00:49 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-12-11 00:29 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 18:30 +0000
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-12-11 11:09 -0800
Auto-execute code at exit? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2017-12-10 15:05 -0800
Re: Auto-execute code at exit? mcheung63@gmail.com - 2017-12-24 21:04 -0800
Page 14 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 16 Next page →
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-23 21:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <874lohdupc.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #124618 |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: > On 12/23/2017 06:57 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: > ... >>> I'll grant you that pointers might contain an >>> encoded form of the address, and the encoding might be different for >>> pointers to different types, such as &s and &s[0], but I'd normally >>> expect that the address being encoded would be the equivalent. >> >> Right, but that's a philosophical point about what these two >> representations mean. I don't think bartc (nor quite a few other >> readers) would say that two very different-looking addresses were in >> fact "the same address". bartc used the term "the same address" to >> explain why the code above is OK, so at the very least you need to use >> different words to explain why it won't work despite the addresses being >> "the same". > > I would say that what he's trying to do is not guaranteed to work > because the two addresses, while guaranteed by the standard to be > equivalent, are not necessarily the same address OK, but now I'm baffled why you said "That's entirely correct" when bartc said the two addresses "are going to be exactly the same address". Anyway, I don't think there is any matter of fact we disagree on here. <text removed> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-23 16:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <p1mgu4$1iv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #124628 |
On 12/23/2017 04:02 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: > >> On 12/23/2017 06:57 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>> "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: >> ... >>>> I'll grant you that pointers might contain an >>>> encoded form of the address, and the encoding might be different for >>>> pointers to different types, such as &s and &s[0], but I'd normally >>>> expect that the address being encoded would be the equivalent. >>> >>> Right, but that's a philosophical point about what these two >>> representations mean. I don't think bartc (nor quite a few other >>> readers) would say that two very different-looking addresses were in >>> fact "the same address". bartc used the term "the same address" to >>> explain why the code above is OK, so at the very least you need to use >>> different words to explain why it won't work despite the addresses being >>> "the same". >> >> I would say that what he's trying to do is not guaranteed to work >> because the two addresses, while guaranteed by the standard to be >> equivalent, are not necessarily the same address > > OK, but now I'm baffled why you said "That's entirely correct" when > bartc said the two addresses "are going to be exactly the same address". Because addresses that are equivalent rather than being exactly the same would have been sufficient to make his code work as intended, if it hadn't been for the fact that they had incompatible types. That's what "equivalent" means in this context. If the addresses had been identical, and not merely equivalent, the fact that they had incompatible types would still have been sufficient to be problematic. I was trying to redirect his attention away from an irrelevancy to the real issue.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-23 22:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <CzA%B.133627$pC5.41377@fx41.am4> |
| In reply to | #124629 |
On 23/12/2017 21:13, James Kuyper wrote:
> On 12/23/2017 04:02 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes:
>>
>>> On 12/23/2017 06:57 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes:
>>> ...
>>>>> I'll grant you that pointers might contain an
>>>>> encoded form of the address, and the encoding might be different for
>>>>> pointers to different types, such as &s and &s[0], but I'd normally
>>>>> expect that the address being encoded would be the equivalent.
>>>>
>>>> Right, but that's a philosophical point about what these two
>>>> representations mean. I don't think bartc (nor quite a few other
>>>> readers) would say that two very different-looking addresses were in
>>>> fact "the same address". bartc used the term "the same address" to
>>>> explain why the code above is OK, so at the very least you need to use
>>>> different words to explain why it won't work despite the addresses being
>>>> "the same".
>>>
>>> I would say that what he's trying to do is not guaranteed to work
>>> because the two addresses, while guaranteed by the standard to be
>>> equivalent, are not necessarily the same address
>>
>> OK, but now I'm baffled why you said "That's entirely correct" when
>> bartc said the two addresses "are going to be exactly the same address".
>
> Because addresses that are equivalent rather than being exactly the same
> would have been sufficient to make his code work as intended, if it
> hadn't been for the fact that they had incompatible types.
How does it work here:
char s[20];
printf("%p\n", s);
printf("%p\n", &s[0]);
Each line has an incompatible pointer type, yet the same address, of
whatever type, can be converted to the representation of a pointer.
How can this be done if, for example, those two types of pointers were
very different?
The difference is that inside the implementation of printf, the address
is processed for %s rather than for %p.
It seems to me that for a variadic argument, any pointer value can be
considered to be notionally cast to void*, and then cast back into a
pointer to a concrete type, as needed inside printf.
--
bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-23 14:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lnmv29gj1l.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #124632 |
bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> How does it work here:
>
> char s[20];
>
> printf("%p\n", s);
> printf("%p\n", &s[0]);
>
> Each line has an incompatible pointer type, yet the same address, of
> whatever type, can be converted to the representation of a pointer.
%p requires an argument of type void*. s and &s[0] are both of type
char* (for s, after the implicit conversion). The standard makes
special guarantees about the relationship beween void* and char*.
I'm not 100% certain that those guarantees are sufficient to define the
behavior. If you're curious, look it up. I'd use a (void*) cast
myself.
> How can this be done if, for example, those two types of pointers were
> very different?
In this case, they can't be "very different".
> The difference is that inside the implementation of printf, the address
> is processed for %s rather than for %p.
>
> It seems to me that for a variadic argument, any pointer value can be
> considered to be notionally cast to void*, and then cast back into a
> pointer to a concrete type, as needed inside printf.
No such cast (or conversion) is performed.
From your followup:
> As in my other post, how would that work with: printf("%p", ptr_value)?
If ptr_value is of type void* or of some character pointer type, there's
no problem. If ptr_value is of some other pointer type, the behavior is
undefined. The most common result is that the pointer value is printed
as if it had been explicitly converted to void*, but other results are
possible. The standard does not require a diagnostic.
--
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 | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-23 15:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lnincxgg5w.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #124634 |
Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:
> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> [...]
>> How does it work here:
>>
>> char s[20];
>>
>> printf("%p\n", s);
>> printf("%p\n", &s[0]);
>>
>> Each line has an incompatible pointer type, yet the same address, of
>> whatever type, can be converted to the representation of a pointer.
>
> %p requires an argument of type void*. s and &s[0] are both of type
> char* (for s, after the implicit conversion). The standard makes
> special guarantees about the relationship beween void* and char*.
>
> I'm not 100% certain that those guarantees are sufficient to define the
> behavior. If you're curious, look it up. I'd use a (void*) cast
> myself.
I was curious, so I looked it up.
N1570 6.2.5p28:
A pointer to void shall have the same representation and alignment
requirements as a pointer to a character type.
with a footnote:
The same representation and alignment requirements are meant to
imply interchangeability as arguments to functions, return values
from functions, and members of unions.
If we rely on the footnote, printf("%p\n", "foo") is safe and
equivalent to printf("%p\n", (void*)"foo"). But footnotes are
non-normative, so an implementation *could* in priciple make them
work differently. Personally, as I said, I'd use a (void*) cast
just to avoid any ambiguity.
As usual, bartc will assert that I'm saying the standard is
flawless and fail to distinguish between describing the standard
and defending it. In fact, I think this guarantee should be made
in normative text. But adding a (void*) cast is so easy that I'm
not going to worry about it.
--
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 | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-23 19:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <p1msn6$f20$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #124634 |
On 12/23/2017 05:45 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> [...]
>> How does it work here:
>>
>> char s[20];
>>
>> printf("%p\n", s);
>> printf("%p\n", &s[0]);
>>
>> Each line has an incompatible pointer type, yet the same address, of
>> whatever type, can be converted to the representation of a pointer.
...
>> How can this be done if, for example, those two types of pointers were
>> very different?
>
> In this case, they can't be "very different".
Yes - the incompatible pointers I was talking about were &s and &s[0].
In this context, s gets implicitly converted to a pointer of exactly the
same type as &s[0].
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-24 12:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <BMM%B.94884$vp1.387@fx47.am4> |
| In reply to | #124637 |
On 24/12/2017 00:34, James Kuyper wrote:
> On 12/23/2017 05:45 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>> [...]
>>> How does it work here:
>>>
>>> char s[20];
>>>
>>> printf("%p\n", s);
>>> printf("%p\n", &s[0]);
>>>
>>> Each line has an incompatible pointer type, yet the same address, of
>>> whatever type, can be converted to the representation of a pointer.
> ...
>>> How can this be done if, for example, those two types of pointers were
>>> very different?
>>
>> In this case, they can't be "very different".
>
> Yes - the incompatible pointers I was talking about were &s and &s[0].
> In this context, s gets implicitly converted to a pointer of exactly the
> same type as &s[0].
>
What context is that? And would it be different here:
char s[10];
int prnitf(char*, ...);
prnitf("%S\N", &s[0]);
prnitf("%S\N", &s);
or here:
printf("%s\n", &s[0]);
printf("%s\n", &s);
--
bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-24 12:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p1o5h5$co4$5@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #124640 |
On 2017-12-24, bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
> On 24/12/2017 00:34, James Kuyper wrote:
>> On 12/23/2017 05:45 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>> [...]
>>>> How does it work here:
>>>>
>>>> char s[20];
>>>>
>>>> printf("%p\n", s);
>>>> printf("%p\n", &s[0]);
>>>>
>>>> Each line has an incompatible pointer type, yet the same address, of
>>>> whatever type, can be converted to the representation of a pointer.
>> ...
>>>> How can this be done if, for example, those two types of pointers were
>>>> very different?
>>>
>>> In this case, they can't be "very different".
>>
>> Yes - the incompatible pointers I was talking about were &s and &s[0].
>> In this context, s gets implicitly converted to a pointer of exactly the
>> same type as &s[0].
>>
>
> What context is that? And would it be different here:
>
> char s[10];
> int prnitf(char*, ...);
>
> prnitf("%S\N", &s[0]);
> prnitf("%S\N", &s);
>
> or here:
>
> printf("%s\n", &s[0]);
> printf("%s\n", &s);
>
Escuse me, but &s is address of array and &s[0] is address of first
element? I have never used &s , but just `s` as array is implicitely
converted to pointer to first element...
--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-24 12:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vVM%B.95355$vp1.78129@fx47.am4> |
| In reply to | #124641 |
On 24/12/2017 12:11, Melzzzzz wrote: > On 2017-12-24, bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> On 24/12/2017 00:34, James Kuyper wrote: >>> Yes - the incompatible pointers I was talking about were &s and &s[0]. >>> In this context, s gets implicitly converted to a pointer of exactly the >>> same type as &s[0]. >>> >> >> What context is that? And would it be different here: > Escuse me, but &s is address of array and &s[0] is address of first > element? I have never used &s , but just `s` as array is implicitely > converted to pointer to first element... Oh, OK. I was assuming that here: "Yes - the incompatible pointers I was talking about were &s and &s[0]. In this context, s gets implicitly converted..." the latter "s" was implicitly referring to the same "&s" just mentioned, and that that somehow was converted, thanks to some magic going in with variadic functions, to be the same as &s[0]. -- bart
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jameskuyper@verizon.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-24 05:49 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <5a0a9055-10d4-412f-a685-a5631c0cc6a3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #124642 |
On Sunday, December 24, 2017 at 7:17:39 AM UTC-5, Bart wrote: > On 24/12/2017 12:11, Melzzzzz wrote: > > On 2017-12-24, bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > >> On 24/12/2017 00:34, James Kuyper wrote: > > >>> Yes - the incompatible pointers I was talking about were &s and &s[0]. > >>> In this context, s gets implicitly converted to a pointer of exactly the > >>> same type as &s[0]. > >>> > >> > >> What context is that? And would it be different here: > > > Escuse me, but &s is address of array and &s[0] is address of first > > element? I have never used &s , but just `s` as array is implicitely > > converted to pointer to first element... > > Oh, OK. I was assuming that here: > > "Yes - the incompatible pointers I was talking about were &s and &s[0]. Looking back, I see that I was in error here. Those pointers are incompatible, but the incompatible pointers I was referring to appeared in your message with "Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:58:00 +0000", and in that message they were &s and s. In the context in which it occurred, s was equivalent to &s[0], but that's not what you actually wrote in that message. > In this context, s gets implicitly converted..." In that sentence, "this context" refers to the most recent message from you on this thread, the one with "Date: "Sat, 23 Dec 2017 22:15:59 +0000". It did not occur to me that you might think it referred to my own previous sentence, but after the fact I can see how you might reach that conclusion. I could have avoided confusion by reversing the order of those two sentences.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-24 13:06 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lna7y7hm4g.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #124642 |
bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> the latter "s" was implicitly referring to the same "&s" just mentioned,
> and that that somehow was converted, thanks to some magic going in with
> variadic functions, to be the same as &s[0].
The implicit conversion (compile-time adjustment) of an array expression
to a pointer expression has nothing to do with variadic functions. See
N1570 6.3.2.1p3. (That paragraph has a minor error, not relevant to the
current discussion, in referring to the _Alignof operator, corrected in
the published standard.)
--
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 | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-23 13:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lnr2rlglkg.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #124616 |
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:
[...]
> printf does not do a conversion from one type to another. It takes the
> bits of the passed pointer and interprets them as being a
> representation of a pointer of the required type.
[...]
The standard doesn't even guarantee that much. I expect that most
implementations of printf behave that way, but if the format and
the argument are inconsistent printf might not even have access to
the bits.
A plausible scenario: char* and char(*)[N] are represented
differently and are passed in different registers, or one is passed
in a register and the other in memory.
--
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 | 2017-12-23 22:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <IAA%B.133628$pC5.14819@fx41.am4> |
| In reply to | #124631 |
On 23/12/2017 21:51, Keith Thompson wrote:
> Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:
> [...]
>> printf does not do a conversion from one type to another. It takes the
>> bits of the passed pointer and interprets them as being a
>> representation of a pointer of the required type.
> [...]
>
> The standard doesn't even guarantee that much. I expect that most
> implementations of printf behave that way, but if the format and
> the argument are inconsistent printf might not even have access to
> the bits.
>
> A plausible scenario: char* and char(*)[N] are represented
> differently and are passed in different registers, or one is passed
> in a register and the other in memory.
As in my other post, how would that work with: printf("%p", ptr_value)?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-22 18:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87mv2a7gob.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #124592 |
jameskuyper@verizon.net writes: > As long as you're certain that neither of those issues will ever come > up on any of the systems you intend to use to translate this C code, > you're free to ignore those warnings, but it's so simple to do this > right that I don't see why you'd bother deliberately doing it wrong. Hanlon's Razor applies.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-22 19:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dFc%B.38945$ba4.1113@fx24.am4> |
| In reply to | #124592 |
On 22/12/2017 15:55, jameskuyper@verizon.net wrote: > On Thursday, December 21, 2017 at 8:33:23 PM UTC-5, Bart wrote: > But C pointers have not only an address, but also a type, and pointers to > different types can have different representations. They can even be passed > using different mechanisms when calling a function. As long as you're certain > that neither of those issues will ever come up on any of the systems you intend > to use to translate this C code, you're free to ignore those warnings, but it's > so simple to do this right that I don't see why you'd bother deliberately doing > it wrong. It's not that simple. In the case of clock(), it apparently has a type that is variable across OSes. Also I don't want to have to kowtow to C to that extent. Suppose I have a binary function F in a library, written in language X. I want to call F from a program in language X. Or maybe they are X and Y. Currently X is compiled to ASM, and that ASM calls F. Everything works perfectly; F expects the address of some block of bytes, and that is exactly what the program provides. But then I want to go through C instead, perhaps for a bit of extra speed via its optimising compiler. Now, however, everything has to be just so. You can't just have the address of a block of bytes, you either have the address of one byte, or the address of the whole block, as they are apparently different. (Even though, when C has an array of bytes and you want to pass a pointer to the array, you generally pass the address of the first byte. And the receiving can choose to cast the latter to the address of the array, so the information is there.) But it is quite a lot of work to try to get this right so that either the C compiler shuts up about a lot of harmless warnings, or doesn't gets the idea that I'm invoking undefined behaviour and then doesn't do what I want or does something I don't want. > Right - so why are you print p->uvalue with a "%f", instead of p->xvalue, which > would be the correct one to use? That was a mistake (although it gives the right result here). It's a mistake due to my decision to use C library function that allows such mistakes. > It's literally a single character correction. > Your insistence on printing the wrong member of the union baffles me. Who's insisting? I changed it. But you're thinking of short term fixes. I've decided I won't use printf family functions of C in the user-code of a non-C language (except for a quick sneaky call when no-one's looking). Because I'm concerned about introducing the problems of C's format system into my own non-C programs, where there is no way of checking the format. It can cause errors (as it has, otherwise there wouldn't be this subthread.) -- bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-20 17:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87o9mtgupv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #124523 |
bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > > mc /c64 hello > > > gcc -c -std=c11 -pedantic -Wall -Wno-missing-braces -Wextra > -Wno-missing-field-initializers -Wformat=2 -Wswitch-default > -Wswitch-enum -Wcast-align -Wpointer-arith -Wbad-function-cast > -Wstrict-overflow=5 -Wstrict-prototypes -Winline -Wundef > -Wnested-externs -Wcast-qual -Wshadow -Wunreachable-code > -Wlogical-op -Wfloat-equal -Wstrict-aliasing=2 -Wredundant-decls > -Wold-style-definition -Werror -ggdb3 -O3 -fno-omit-frame-pointer > -ffloat-store -fno-common -fstrict-aliasing Why do you want all those warnings on generated code? There are a few non-warning flags at the end but even those look redundant but maybe you know you generate C that, for example, breaks the effective type rules -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-18 17:22 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lnpo7bjyv4.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #124497 |
bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> I'm not gcc-centric. If I use that compiler, it will be with the
> absolute minimal set of options.
I've written and deleted several responses to that paragraph.
I am speechless.
<snip>
> In fact, I've just spent a few minutes doing exactly that with my C
> compiler: by default, a () parameter list is illegal. It's necessary
> to use an option (-old) to help compile existing code when it is not
> practical to update it.
So your C compiler is non-conforming by default. Fascinating.
<snip>
--
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 | 2017-12-19 01:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <46_ZB.22969$Jg1.16854@fx33.am4> |
| In reply to | #124499 |
On 19/12/2017 01:22, Keith Thompson wrote: > bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > [...] >> I'm not gcc-centric. If I use that compiler, it will be with the >> absolute minimal set of options. > > I've written and deleted several responses to that paragraph. > I am speechless. > > <snip> > >> In fact, I've just spent a few minutes doing exactly that with my C >> compiler: by default, a () parameter list is illegal. It's necessary >> to use an option (-old) to help compile existing code when it is not >> practical to update it. > > So your C compiler is non-conforming by default. Fascinating. Umm -- isn't gcc as well? Practically every complaint I make about C, David Brown comes up with some obscure option of gcc to fix it or detect it. Which suggests that used in default mode, gcc is pretty much useless, as many things are not detected, or just result in warnings. So isn't it better that with default options, it is in fail-safe mode in detecting and reporting the most obvious errors as actual errors? And nobody has yet explained to me why the same fragment code being compiled variously as OK/WARNING/ERROR does any good at all. bart
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-19 09:54 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <p1ak4h$4ii$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #124502 |
On 19/12/17 02:41, bartc wrote: > On 19/12/2017 01:22, Keith Thompson wrote: >> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >> [...] >>> I'm not gcc-centric. If I use that compiler, it will be with the >>> absolute minimal set of options. >> >> I've written and deleted several responses to that paragraph. >> I am speechless. >> >> <snip> >> >>> In fact, I've just spent a few minutes doing exactly that with my C >>> compiler: by default, a () parameter list is illegal. It's necessary >>> to use an option (-old) to help compile existing code when it is not >>> practical to update it. >> >> So your C compiler is non-conforming by default. Fascinating. > > Umm -- isn't gcc as well? Of course it is. Almost every C compiler is non-conforming by default, in at least some ways. Most, however, are extra permissive - they accept correct code unless it happens to conflict with one of their extensions (like defining an identifier that matches an extension keyword). Non-conformance is often shown in being /too/ accepting, and failing to give required diagnostics. Your compiler here is unusual in rejecting valid, legal, correct C code by default - simply because it is poor style, hard to check, and an obsolete feature. I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing, but it depends on the expected use of your tool - it is no good if people expect to be able to take old but valid code and compile it, but it could be helpful for people writing new code. > > Practically every complaint I make about C, David Brown comes up with > some obscure option of gcc to fix it or detect it. Forgive me for trying to be helpful and teach you something. Hopefully others reading this newsgroup may find it useful to learn something about C and/or C compilers. And while this is not in any way a gcc newsgroup, that compiler is used by many people - I have had feedback from people that appreciate such information. (There are also others here who are better qualified in giving details of standard C behaviour, so that part is covered too.) And while some of the options I tell you about may be a little obscure, most are not - and all are clearly documented in obvious places. (gcc also has some really obscure options, but I they are not relevant here.) > > Which suggests that used in default mode, gcc is pretty much useless, as > many things are not detected, or just result in warnings. Many people find it very useful in its default mode. But gcc has a wide selection of options precisely because people use it in widely different ways for widely different things. If you are taking an existing correct C program, and simply want to build a binary out of it, then you will be looking at options such as -O2 for optimisation, -o program to give it a name, -march=native to tune it to your computer. If you are writing your own code, you will likely want lots of warnings enabled, such as -Wall -Wextra -Wstrict-prototypes (I have a long list of the ones I use - you would not like them all because some are tuned to the style I use). If you are running the code under a debugger, you will want -g and perhaps -Og. If you are doing performance analysis, you will want other options. And so on. People write C in different styles, for different purposes. A compiler like gcc tries to support them /all/, and does a fine (but certainly not perfect) job of it - but /you/ have to work with the compiler to tell it what you want from it. Part of your trouble, I think, is that you have written your little toy C compiler and you think that is all there is to it. You have moulded a rock to fit your hand and are using it to bash nails into wood - and fail to understand that other people might want a toolbox full of different tools for related purposes. The tool at the top happens to be a screwdriver, and not ideal for bashing nails - you are then condemning the whole toolbox. > > So isn't it better that with default options, it is in fail-safe mode in > detecting and reporting the most obvious errors as actual errors? > > And nobody has yet explained to me why the same fragment code being > compiled variously as OK/WARNING/ERROR does any good at all. > Actually, several people (including me) /have/ explained many times. But you have not listened - you don't want to hear explanations, you want to rant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-12-19 13:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5p8_B.22454$oi6.4226@fx40.am4> |
| In reply to | #124506 |
On 19/12/2017 08:54, David Brown wrote:
> On 19/12/17 02:41, bartc wrote:
>> On 19/12/2017 01:22, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> So your C compiler is non-conforming by default. Fascinating.
>>
>> Umm -- isn't gcc as well?
>
> Of course it is.
So what's Keith on about then?
> Your compiler here is unusual in rejecting valid, legal, correct C code
> by default - simply because it is poor style, hard to check, and an
> obsolete feature. I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing, but it
> depends on the expected use of your tool - it is no good if people
> expect to be able to take old but valid code and compile it, but it
> could be helpful for people writing new code.
If I want to compile Small C, then I can do it like this:
mcc smlrc
if I change the handful of occurrences of T fn() {...} to T fn(void)
{...}. Otherwise, to keep the source unchanged (or to avoid having to
change it for each fresh download), it's:
mcc -old smlrc
But many obsolete features it will not support at all, such as implicit
functions, except with a special option - use a different compiler.
----------------------------------------
Dealing with () paramlists to use mcc without -old option:
(1) Used in T func() {...}
Change to T func(void) {...}
(2) Using void (fnptr*)() as a generic function pointer
Use instead 'void (fnptr*)(void)', or possibly 'void (fnptr*)(struct
{})'. Or equivalent code that will work with other compilers.
(3) Using T func() to allow calls to func with unchecked arguments. (Can
be same argument numbers and types each time or different.)
For mcc, use instead T func(...).
(On other compilers, ... may need at least one normal parameter. This is
necessary for variadic arguments, but it is expected that the actual
definition of func() is not variadic.)
(4) Using T func() when a proper definition/declaration of func is also
visible.
Get rid of the unnecessary T func() declarations.
----------------------------------------
> And while some of the options I tell you about may be a little obscure,
> most are not - and all are clearly documented in obvious places. (gcc
> also has some really obscure options, but I they are not relevant here.)
I don't believe in options except for the most basic such as -O3 or -E
or -c to control aspects of the compilation process.
> Part of your trouble, I think, is that you have written your little toy
> C compiler and you think that is all there is to it.
It converts .c sources to .obj files. And does it without any fuss.
What else is there? You are obviously a power user and need all sorts of
bells and whistles that others have no need for.
And when they do, to create a production version that runs at full speed
for example, they can just run code through gcc -O3. But this is now
working code which doesn't need all those extra options.
Or maybe someone might want to use the myriad options of gcc as a kind
of lint. But most of the time they can use a nippy, lightweight
compiler. (One which, if used by different people, is more likely to
give the same behaviour on the same code because it doesn't allow each
person to create their own dialect of C.)
--
bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 14 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web