Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #35642 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Sharwan Joram <sharwan.joram@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-08-23 10:15 -0700 |
| Last post | 2013-08-26 09:23 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 187 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Sharwan Joram <sharwan.joram@gmail.com> - 2013-08-23 10:15 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-23 14:05 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Sharwan Joram <sharwan.joram@gmail.com> - 2013-08-23 11:17 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-23 14:51 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2013-08-24 21:50 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-24 15:36 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-23 13:18 -0500
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-23 20:00 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-23 21:37 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2013-08-23 14:16 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-23 17:50 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-23 22:56 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-24 13:45 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-24 06:20 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-24 20:16 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-24 16:51 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2013-08-25 12:27 +1200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-24 18:02 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2013-08-25 15:03 +1200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-25 08:09 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-25 14:02 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-25 22:43 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-25 02:21 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-24 19:41 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-24 15:15 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-24 02:48 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-08-24 17:02 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Sharwan Joram <sharwan.joram@gmail.com> - 2013-08-24 12:05 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2013-08-24 15:14 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-24 15:38 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-25 02:10 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Sharwan Joram <sharwan.joram@gmail.com> - 2013-08-25 00:30 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-25 21:13 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-08-25 11:13 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-25 10:03 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-25 14:07 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-25 18:47 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-26 06:40 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 06:31 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2013-08-26 07:44 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-26 15:15 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 07:50 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-08-26 16:08 +0200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 11:42 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-08-26 18:16 +0200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-26 17:10 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-08-27 09:27 +0200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-27 07:42 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-27 18:38 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-27 15:14 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-27 14:23 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2013-08-27 16:06 -0600
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-27 15:14 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-27 23:17 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-08-28 20:34 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-28 11:06 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-28 22:31 -0500
[OT] significant digits James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-29 06:53 -0400
Re: [OT] significant digits Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-29 16:51 -0500
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-28 15:05 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-08-28 00:05 +0200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2013-08-28 10:08 +1200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-27 18:30 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-08-28 09:39 +0200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-28 04:04 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-28 22:35 -0500
[OT] English [was: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer] James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-28 07:10 -0400
Re: [OT] English [was: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer] David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-08-28 14:50 +0200
Re: [OT] English [was: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer] ralph <nt_consulting@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-28 12:29 -0500
Re: [OT] English [was: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer] Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2013-08-30 00:57 -0700
Re: [OT] English [was: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer] David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-08-30 10:07 +0200
Re: [OT] English [was: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer] Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-08-28 20:46 +0300
Re: [OT] English [was: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer] James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-28 15:13 -0400
Re: [OT] English [was: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer] Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2013-08-29 08:40 +1200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-28 03:58 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-08-28 09:58 +0200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-27 11:45 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-27 23:23 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-27 16:47 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-28 03:29 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-26 16:54 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 13:26 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2013-08-28 22:27 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-29 05:18 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2013-09-04 00:01 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-04 05:40 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2013-08-27 08:54 +1200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-26 21:09 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2013-08-27 09:16 +1200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-26 21:39 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2013-08-27 09:42 +1200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-26 21:52 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2013-08-26 17:46 -0500
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 17:12 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2013-08-27 09:17 +1200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 18:45 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2013-08-27 11:03 +1200
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 08:52 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-26 17:20 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 10:59 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-26 11:31 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-26 19:30 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-26 19:26 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 13:37 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-26 22:20 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-08-27 16:42 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-27 10:28 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-08-28 20:29 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2013-08-28 22:27 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-26 19:18 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 15:41 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-26 12:58 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-26 20:52 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-26 14:35 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-27 00:48 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2013-08-28 22:27 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-29 03:40 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2013-09-04 00:01 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-29 05:27 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-30 01:40 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2013-08-26 17:51 -0500
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-27 08:24 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-27 08:12 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-27 11:48 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 13:28 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-26 20:40 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 14:36 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-26 21:43 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-26 21:59 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 15:26 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-08-27 16:52 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-28 16:16 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-28 10:54 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-08-28 20:56 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-28 19:23 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2013-08-28 23:31 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-27 07:00 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-27 11:41 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-28 16:21 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-28 10:57 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-28 21:27 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2013-08-28 14:53 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-08-27 16:37 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-08-27 16:29 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-28 16:11 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-28 02:45 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2013-08-28 20:47 +0000
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-28 16:22 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-29 13:36 -0500
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-29 20:06 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2013-08-30 10:48 -0500
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-30 18:34 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-08-27 16:25 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-27 10:06 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-08-27 18:21 +0300
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-27 12:16 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-28 02:25 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-27 11:51 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-26 02:55 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-26 03:04 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-25 19:02 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-25 20:01 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-25 22:49 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-25 23:07 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-25 23:20 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-26 13:03 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 07:02 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-26 08:27 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 11:52 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 08:57 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2013-08-26 04:53 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-26 12:58 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Sharwan Joram <sharwan.joram@gmail.com> - 2013-08-26 06:40 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-26 15:28 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-26 14:54 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 18:22 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 15:31 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-08-27 01:08 +0100
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-26 22:02 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2013-08-26 21:07 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 08:29 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-26 08:46 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 08:59 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-26 09:19 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2013-08-26 10:47 -0700
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2013-08-26 12:18 -0400
Re: Memory corruption on freeing a pointer to pointer gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-08-26 09:23 -0700
Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10 Next page →
| From | Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-26 15:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn3vfsl1ms97.atm.ike@iceland.freeshell.org> |
| In reply to | #35827 |
On 2013-08-26, Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> wrote: > Only if the jarring is based on pure C language semantics. I think the > previous person was referring to the fact that for English speakers, the > sentence X equals Y, has a different grammatical implications than Y > equals X, as the first variable is the subject of the verb equals and > the second is the object of the verb, and linguistically, the subject of > the verb is more important and should naturally be the variable, not the > constant, as the subject is what is being tested and the object the > value being tested for. It is just the fact that equals has this funny > transitive property that makes swapping make sense programatically, even > if it doesn't really change what makes sense linguistically. > > The order NULL == var is jarring because we have no need to test for the > properties of NULL, we know everything possible about it. A mathematical formula is not English prose and should not be read as such.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-26 07:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kvffeh$n1v$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #35821 |
On 08/26/2013 02:40 AM, Ike Naar wrote:
> On 2013-08-25, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:
>> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes:
>>> On 08/24/2013 03:05 PM, Sharwan Joram wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> if ( NULL == parameters[parametercount]){
>>
>> This is what's known as a "Yoda conndition"
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoda_Conditions>. I know that a lot of
>> programmers like them, and for somewhat valid reasons, but personally I
>> find them jarring and unnecessary. Personally, I'd write that as:
>>
>> if (parameters[parametercount] == NULL) {
>
> Does it matter? The == operator is symmetric, (X==Y) == (Y==X).
Yes, it matters - because it's intended to protect against the typo
which replaces == with =, by ensuring that it would cause a constraint
violation. The assignment operator is very definitely not symmetric.
--
James Kuyper
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-26 16:08 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <3bmdnREVQZb2_IbPnZ2dnUVZ8qKdnZ2d@lyse.net> |
| In reply to | #35828 |
On 26/08/13 13:50, James Kuyper wrote:
> On 08/26/2013 02:40 AM, Ike Naar wrote:
>> On 2013-08-25, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:
>>> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes:
>>>> On 08/24/2013 03:05 PM, Sharwan Joram wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> if ( NULL == parameters[parametercount]){
>>>
>>> This is what's known as a "Yoda conndition"
>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoda_Conditions>. I know that a lot of
>>> programmers like them, and for somewhat valid reasons, but personally I
>>> find them jarring and unnecessary. Personally, I'd write that as:
>>>
>>> if (parameters[parametercount] == NULL) {
>>
>> Does it matter? The == operator is symmetric, (X==Y) == (Y==X).
>
> Yes, it matters - because it's intended to protect against the typo
> which replaces == with =, by ensuring that it would cause a constraint
> violation. The assignment operator is very definitely not symmetric.
>
The "Yoda condition" is the habit of writing "if (1 == a)" rather than
"if (a == 1)", so that typos will lead to compiler errors - "if (1 = a)"
is a syntax error, while "if (a = 1)" is legal C and can be accepted by
the compiler.
However, that assumes you either have a very poor compiler (and no lint
tool to back it up), or you don't know how to use it properly. Unless
you are masochistic and enjoy finding hard-to-debug errors in your code,
you let your compiler do a lot of static error checking. For example,
with gcc you would normally enable at least "-Wall" warnings. Then "if
(a = 1)" will give you a warning, as your code is probably wrong, and
you must write "if ((a = 1))" to disable that warning. Compilers will
often also give you warnings about unreachable code, since the
conditional always goes the same way.
In my opinion, it is better to do proper static error checking to
eliminate the risk of such typos, rather than to write your code backwards.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-26 11:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <521B7764.40007@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #35833 |
On 08/26/2013 10:08 AM, David Brown wrote: ... > The "Yoda condition" is the habit of writing "if (1 == a)" rather than > "if (a == 1)", so that typos will lead to compiler errors - "if (1 = a)" > is a syntax error, while "if (a = 1)" is legal C and can be accepted by > the compiler. > > However, that assumes you either have a very poor compiler (and no lint > tool to back it up), or you don't know how to use it properly. Unless > you are masochistic and enjoy finding hard-to-debug errors in your code, > you let your compiler do a lot of static error checking. I don't use Yoda-conditions, but I appreciate the arguments of those that do. I don't like to rely on diagnostics that are not mandated by the standard, and the ones you're talking about aren't. I do prefer compilers that provide such warnings. ... > In my opinion, it is better to do proper static error checking to > eliminate the risk of such typos, rather than to write your code backwards. The code, as such, is neither forwards nor backwards. The idea that there's a preferred order to the arguments of == has nothing to do with any aspect of C itself; it seems to be based in linguistic preferences. I share those preferences, but I wouldn't elevate them to issues of code correctness, by calling the other order "backwards". I wouldn't be surprised to find that people whose native language is not English might find the "backwards" order more reasonable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-26 18:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <WPSdnVf8HKLK4obPnZ2dnUVZ8nGdnZ2d@lyse.net> |
| In reply to | #35838 |
On 26/08/13 17:42, James Kuyper wrote: > On 08/26/2013 10:08 AM, David Brown wrote: > ... >> The "Yoda condition" is the habit of writing "if (1 == a)" rather than >> "if (a == 1)", so that typos will lead to compiler errors - "if (1 = a)" >> is a syntax error, while "if (a = 1)" is legal C and can be accepted by >> the compiler. >> >> However, that assumes you either have a very poor compiler (and no lint >> tool to back it up), or you don't know how to use it properly. Unless >> you are masochistic and enjoy finding hard-to-debug errors in your code, >> you let your compiler do a lot of static error checking. > > I don't use Yoda-conditions, but I appreciate the arguments of those > that do. I don't like to rely on diagnostics that are not mandated by > the standard, and the ones you're talking about aren't. I do prefer > compilers that provide such warnings. > C allows far too much freedom to write incorrect (or technically correct, but unintelligible) code. If a student was doing a programming language design course and submitted C as a project, they'd get an immediate fail. But for many reasons, it is the best language we have for a lot of uses, so we use it despite its failings. However, I think it is very important to limit the risk of mistakes, and to improve the readability and safety of the language by using good programming styles and good programming tools (such as static error checking). These don't limit or detract from the good points of C, but make it into a more complete and modern development tool. In fact, as I understand my history, part of the reason that C was designed so "tolerant" of errors is that it was assumed that programmers would use "lint" tools - separating the actual compilation from the static error checking. So for my own use, and for the use of others at my work, I don't see such warning flags and error checking as a "nice to have" extra - I see them as mandatory for good development practice. But I am fully aware that others have different opinions and practices. > ... >> In my opinion, it is better to do proper static error checking to >> eliminate the risk of such typos, rather than to write your code backwards. > > The code, as such, is neither forwards nor backwards. The idea that > there's a preferred order to the arguments of == has nothing to do with > any aspect of C itself; it seems to be based in linguistic preferences. > I share those preferences, but I wouldn't elevate them to issues of code > correctness, by calling the other order "backwards". I wouldn't be > surprised to find that people whose native language is not English might > find the "backwards" order more reasonable. > I understand your arguments here. But I program in English, as do most people whether they are native speakers or not (I live and work in Norway, so I use Norwegian for most non-programming activities). Like most programming languages, C was designed by English speakers without much consideration for other languages - and I therefore don't see any issues with tying the concept of "backwards" here to the English language. A vital part of good programming is writing code that reads easily and clearly. I think that "if (a == 1)" makes more sense when read than "if (1 == a)" - therefore I think it is better code. But as noted above, this is all my opinion. I can dictate this sort of thing within my company, but outside that I have to accept that some people have different thoughts, even if they are wrong :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-26 17:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kvg259$s46$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #35838 |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> wrote: > On 08/26/2013 10:08 AM, David Brown wrote: >> The "Yoda condition" is the habit of writing "if (1 == a)" rather than >> "if (a == 1)", so that typos will lead to compiler errors - "if (1 = a)" (snip) Yes, I was just thinking about Yoda. (snip) > The code, as such, is neither forwards nor backwards. The idea that > there's a preferred order to the arguments of == has nothing to do with > any aspect of C itself; it seems to be based in linguistic preferences. > I share those preferences, but I wouldn't elevate them to issues of code > correctness, by calling the other order "backwards". I wouldn't be > surprised to find that people whose native language is not English might > find the "backwards" order more reasonable. Reminds me of wondering why so many programming languages use English keywords. Seems to me that there might be some programming languages that do assignment left to right, though most do it right to left. It seems that both orders are used for assmeblers (and often the corresponding machine instructions) for MOVE and other data movement instructions. So, yes, I would not be surprised to see a different order for non-native English speakers, or non-English speakers coding C, or other programming languages. -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-27 09:27 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1eydnQzBi4VxyYHPnZ2dnUVZ8iGdnZ2d@lyse.net> |
| In reply to | #35851 |
On 26/08/13 19:10, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> wrote: >> On 08/26/2013 10:08 AM, David Brown wrote: > >>> The "Yoda condition" is the habit of writing "if (1 == a)" rather than >>> "if (a == 1)", so that typos will lead to compiler errors - "if (1 = a)" > > (snip) > > Yes, I was just thinking about Yoda. > > (snip) > >> The code, as such, is neither forwards nor backwards. The idea that >> there's a preferred order to the arguments of == has nothing to do with >> any aspect of C itself; it seems to be based in linguistic preferences. >> I share those preferences, but I wouldn't elevate them to issues of code >> correctness, by calling the other order "backwards". I wouldn't be >> surprised to find that people whose native language is not English might >> find the "backwards" order more reasonable. > > Reminds me of wondering why so many programming languages use > English keywords. > > Seems to me that there might be some programming languages that do > assignment left to right, though most do it right to left. > I have a vague recollection of seeing assignment done with something like "1 -> a" in some language, but I can't remember which. The symbol used was an arrow, so the direction of assignment was obvious. > It seems that both orders are used for assmeblers (and often > the corresponding machine instructions) for MOVE and other > data movement instructions. Yes, both orders "Rd, Rs" and "Rs, Rd" are used. I've used assembly on perhaps 15 different processors - there is no consensus. There are even processors with more than one assembly syntax with different orders (on x86, there is "AT&T" with source, dest ordering and "Intel" with dest, source ordering). > > So, yes, I would not be surprised to see a different order for > non-native English speakers, or non-English speakers coding C, > or other programming languages. > Much of C assumes the ordering from English. Non-native speakers don't have to like it, but they do have live with it - just as people who write /proper/ English have to accept that the developers of the C language can't spell "maths" properly. Of course, programming languages that were written for different human languages may have different ordering. I have heard of a few such languages (there's a list on wikipedia, as always), but never tried any - the only other human language I know is Norwegian, and since Norwegians mostly speak English they would not invent their own Norwegian programming language (and since Norwegian's ordering is the same as English, it would make no difference here).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-27 07:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kvi3c1$1eb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #35927 |
On 08/27/2013 03:27 AM, David Brown wrote: ... > have to like it, but they do have live with it - just as people who > write /proper/ English have to accept that the developers of the C > language can't spell "maths" properly. K&R C was developed in the US, and first standardized by ANSI, a US standards organization. Oddly enough, we use US English here, a dialect in which there is no word which is correctly spelled "maths", but there is one that's correctly spelled "math". If the English had not wanted to lose control of the English language, they shouldn't have conquered and colonized so many countries and forced them to use that language. The English now constitute a minority among native speakers of English. There's many more native speakers of US English alone than there are of all of the British varieties of English. Get over it. -- James Kuyper
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-27 18:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kvirmv$d53$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #35938 |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> wrote: (snip) > If the English had not wanted to lose control of the English language, > they shouldn't have conquered and colonized so many countries and forced > them to use that language. The English now constitute a minority among > native speakers of English. There's many more native speakers of US > English alone than there are of all of the British varieties of English. > Get over it. I once knew that in Europe, English classes were taught in England English and not US English. I suppose I would expect that from other (than US) former English colonies, too. Seems to me that US is louder, but maybe there aren't more of us. -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-27 15:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <521CFA82.9060802@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #35969 |
On 08/27/2013 02:38 PM, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> wrote: > > (snip) > >> If the English had not wanted to lose control of the English language, >> they shouldn't have conquered and colonized so many countries and forced >> them to use that language. The English now constitute a minority among >> native speakers of English. There's many more native speakers of US >> English alone than there are of all of the British varieties of English. >> Get over it. > > I once knew that in Europe, English classes were taught in England > English and not US English. I suppose I would expect that from other > (than US) former English colonies, too. > > Seems to me that US is louder, but maybe there aren't more of us. > > -- glen > <http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/English_language#Geographical_distribution> There's an awful lot of dark blue in that pie chart. The UK wouldn't have a majority of the native speakers of English even if the US, Canada, and Australia all suddenly disappeared.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-27 14:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lnmwo2hlq0.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> |
| In reply to | #35976 |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes:
> <http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/English_language#Geographical_distribution>
".org", not ".or"
> There's an awful lot of dark blue in that pie chart. The UK wouldn't
> have a majority of the native speakers of English even if the US,
> Canada, and Australia all suddenly disappeared.
--
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 | Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-27 16:06 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <1b38purdpc.fsf@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net> |
| In reply to | #35976 |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: > On 08/27/2013 02:38 PM, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: >> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> wrote: >> >> (snip) >> >>> If the English had not wanted to lose control of the English language, >>> they shouldn't have conquered and colonized so many countries and forced >>> them to use that language. The English now constitute a minority among >>> native speakers of English. There's many more native speakers of US >>> English alone than there are of all of the British varieties of English. >>> Get over it. >> >> I once knew that in Europe, English classes were taught in England >> English and not US English. I suppose I would expect that from other >> (than US) former English colonies, too. >> >> Seems to me that US is louder, but maybe there aren't more of us. >> >> -- glen >> > <http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/English_language#Geographical_distribution> > > There's an awful lot of dark blue in that pie chart. The UK wouldn't > have a majority of the native speakers of English even if the US, > Canada, and Australia all suddenly disappeared. When my daughter spent a semester as an exchange student in Germany, the teacher not only taught UK English, he also tried to correct her American pronunciations and slang.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-27 15:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8d52da57-5a19-4fa0-be3b-e8ae9903013d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #35986 |
On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 11:06:23 PM UTC+1, Joe Pfeiffer wrote: > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: > > When my daughter spent a semester as an exchange student in Germany, the > teacher not only taught UK English, he also tried to correct her > American pronunciations and slang. > In the the Chalet School stories, set in an Anglophone school in the Swiss Alps, the girls are reprimanded for "smashing".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-27 23:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kvjc2f$1il$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #35976 |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> wrote: (snip, someone wrote) >>> There's many more native speakers of US >>> English alone than there are of all of the British varieties of English. >>> Get over it. (snip, then I wrote) >> I once knew that in Europe, English classes were taught in England >> English and not US English. I suppose I would expect that from other >> (than US) former English colonies, too. (snip) > <http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/English_language#Geographical_distribution> > There's an awful lot of dark blue in that pie chart. The UK wouldn't > have a majority of the native speakers of English even if the US, > Canada, and Australia all suddenly disappeared. Oh, yes, I was thinking about non-native speakers, too. As much of science is done in English, many students will learn English to do science. According to the table, but not in the pie chart, there are many second and third language English speakers in India, Pakistan, and Nigeria. The second language English speakers from Europe aren't in that chart. I will guess that India and Pakistan use England English, and that Philippines uses American English. -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-28 20:34 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <8738ptyb1l.fsf@bazspaz.fatphil.org> |
| In reply to | #35976 |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: > <http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/English_language#Geographical_distribution> And of course everything on that page is absolutely completely correct - I mean, the authors even know the population of India to 10 significant digits! That's like knowing the radius of the earth to millimetre accuracy! Phil -- If "law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear" from privacy-invading technologies and policies, then law-abiding governments should have nothing to fear from whistleblowers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-28 11:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lnwqn5g05w.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> |
| In reply to | #36026 |
Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes:
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language#Geographical_distribution>
[corrected URL]
>
> And of course everything on that page is absolutely completely correct -
I don't recall anyone claiming that it was.
> I mean, the authors even know the population of India to 10 significant
> digits! That's like knowing the radius of the earth to millimetre accuracy!
The page cites the 2001 census, which presumably reported the
figures in that manner. I'm sure the census wasn't actually that
precise (if nothing else, people were born and died while the census
was in progress), but it would be very difficult (and beyond the
scope of that article) to determine just how precise it really is.
It seems reasonable to quote the raw figures rather than arbitrarily
replacing the last N digits by zeros.
--
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 | Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-28 22:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vlft19prj1fqv4ttof19m71sjt5actn73n@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #36032 |
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:06:35 -0700, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote: >Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> writes: >> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: >>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language#Geographical_distribution> >[corrected URL] >> >> And of course everything on that page is absolutely completely correct - > >I don't recall anyone claiming that it was. > >> I mean, the authors even know the population of India to 10 significant >> digits! That's like knowing the radius of the earth to millimetre accuracy! > >The page cites the 2001 census, which presumably reported the >figures in that manner. I'm sure the census wasn't actually that >precise (if nothing else, people were born and died while the census >was in progress), but it would be very difficult (and beyond the >scope of that article) to determine just how precise it really is. >It seems reasonable to quote the raw figures rather than arbitrarily >replacing the last N digits by zeros. While I don't know how the Indian census work, the U.S. census asks about a particular day (April 1, for the 2010 census), and about people who were living in the surveyed household on that date. So the problem of people being born or dying during the survey is largely eliminated (time zones present an obvious issue, for example). Of course there are all sorts of other sampling problems.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-29 06:53 -0400 |
| Subject | [OT] significant digits |
| Message-ID | <kvn97r$r37$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #36061 |
On 08/28/2013 11:31 PM, Robert Wessel wrote: ... > While I don't know how the Indian census work, the U.S. census asks > about a particular day (April 1, for the 2010 census), and about > people who were living in the surveyed household on that date. So the > problem of people being born or dying during the survey is largely > eliminated (time zones present an obvious issue, for example). While the percentage of the population that was born or died on April 1st was relatively insignificant, with a population as large as that of the US, it's still a fair number of people. The number being counted is still not sufficiently well-defined to justify treating all of the digits in the total as significant. -- James Kuyper
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-29 16:51 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] significant digits |
| Message-ID | <8fgv1951ui50cq7lv1kq5hffod004ssg70@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #36071 |
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 06:53:45 -0400, James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> wrote: >On 08/28/2013 11:31 PM, Robert Wessel wrote: >... >> While I don't know how the Indian census work, the U.S. census asks >> about a particular day (April 1, for the 2010 census), and about >> people who were living in the surveyed household on that date. So the >> problem of people being born or dying during the survey is largely >> eliminated (time zones present an obvious issue, for example). > >While the percentage of the population that was born or died on April >1st was relatively insignificant, with a population as large as that of >the US, it's still a fair number of people. The number being counted is >still not sufficiently well-defined to justify treating all of the >digits in the total as significant. I believe that anyone alive on April 1st was supposed to have been counted. But yes, there are a ton of other problems trying to tweeze more than a couple of significant figures out of the data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-08-28 15:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <521E4A15.3080107@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #36026 |
On 08/28/2013 01:34 PM, Phil Carmody wrote: > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: >> <http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/English_language#Geographical_distribution> > > And of course everything on that page is absolutely completely correct - I don't know of any source of information with those characteristics, and I wouldn't dream of thinking that this was such a source. Do you know of any such source? > I mean, the authors even know the population of India to 10 significant > digits! ... Wikipedia isn't responsible for those numbers or their accuracy or precision; it's only responsible for choosing appropriate authorities, and providing citations, which it has. In this case, the authority is the Indian 2001 Census. If you have objections to that number, contact the people who published that Census. The actual Census report should clearly identify what they think the accuracy of this figure was, and it shouldn't claim that it was accurate to the last digit. On the other hand, the Indians I've known have uniformly criticized the corruption of their own government - it's possible that the Census report was produced by political hacks who knew little or nothing about statistics, in which case I wouldn't even trust the first significant digit. Only if the citation is incorrect, or selected from an inappropriate authority, do you have any basis for criticizing Wikipedia. Do you think that the Indian Census is an inappropriate authority? Do you have reason to believe that this is not the correct number from that census report?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web