Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.unix.programmer > #16587
| From | cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.unix.shell, comp.unix.programmer, comp.lang.misc |
| Subject | Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages |
| Date | 2024-11-22 18:30 +0000 |
| Organization | PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC |
| Message-ID | <vhqik7$nn0$1@reader2.panix.com> (permalink) |
| References | <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me> <877c8vtgx6.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> <sS30P.4663$YSkc.427@fx40.iad> <VZ30P.4664$YSkc.1894@fx40.iad> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
In article <VZ30P.4664$YSkc.1894@fx40.iad>,
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> writes:
>>>cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
>>>> Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> wrote:
>>>>>cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
>>>>>> Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Personally I think that writing bulky procedural stuff for something
>>>>>>>> like [0-9]+ can only be much worse, and that further abbreviations
>>>>>>>> like \d+ are the better direction to go if targeting a good interface.
>>>>>>>> YMMV.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Assuming that p is a pointer to the current position in a string, e is a
>>>>>>>pointer to the end of it (ie, point just past the last byte) and -
>>>>>>>that's important - both are pointers to unsigned quantities, the 'bulky'
>>>>>>>C equivalent of [0-9]+ is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>while (p < e && *p - '0' < 10) ++p;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>That's not too bad. And it's really a hell lot faster than a
>>>>>>>general-purpose automaton programmed to recognize the same pattern
>>>>>>>(which might not matter most of the time, but sometimes, it does).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's also not exactly right. `[0-9]+` would match one or more
>>>>>> characters; this possibly matches 0 (ie, if `p` pointed to
>>>>>> something that wasn't a digit).
>>>>>
>>>>>The regex won't match any digits if there aren't any. In this case, the
>>>>>match will fail. I didn't include the code for handling that because it
>>>>>seemed pretty pointless for the example.
>>>>
>>>> That's rather the point though, isn't it? The program snippet
>>>> (modulo the promotion to signed int via the "usual arithmetic
>>>> conversions" before the subtraction and comparison giving you
>>>> unexpected values; nothing to do with whether `char` is signed
>>>> or not) is a snippet that advances a pointer while it points to
>>>> a digit, starting at the current pointer position; that is, it
>>>> just increments a pointer over a run of digits.
>>>
>>>That's the core part of matching someting equivalent to the regex [0-9]+
>>>and the only part of it is which is at least remotely interesting.
>>>
>>>> But that's not the same as a regex matcher, which has a semantic
>>>> notion of success or failure. I could run your snippet against
>>>> a string such as, say, "ZZZZZZ" and it would "succeed" just as
>>>> it would against an empty string or a string of one or more
>>>> digits.
>>>
>>>Why do you believe that p being equivalent to the starting position
>>>would be considered a "successful match", considering that this
>>>obviously doesn't make any sense?
>>>
>>>[...]
>>>
>>>> By the way, something that _would_ match `^[0-9]+$` might be:
>>>
>>>[too much code]
>>>
>>>Something which would match [0-9]+ in its first argument (if any) would
>>>be:
>>>
>>>#include "string.h"
>>>#include "stdlib.h"
>>>
>>>int main(int argc, char **argv)
>>>{
>>> char *p;
>>> unsigned c;
>>>
>>> p = argv[1];
>>> if (!p) exit(1);
>>> while (c = *p, c && c - '0' > 10) ++p;
>>> if (!c) exit(1);
>>> return 0;
>>>}
>>>
>>>but that's 14 lines of text, 13 of which have absolutely no relation to
>>>the problem of recognizing a digit.
>>
>>Personally, I'd use:
>
>Albeit this is limited to strings of digits that sum to less than
>ULONG_MAX...
It's not quite equivalent to his program, which just exit's with
success if it sees any input string with a digit in it; your's
is closer to what I wrote, which matches `^[0-9]+$`. His is not
an interesting program and certainly not a recognizable
equivalent a regular expression matcher in any reasonable sense,
but I think the cognitive dissonance is too strong to get that
across.
- Dan C.
>>$ cat /tmp/a.c
>>#include <stdint.h>
>>#include <string.h>
>>
>>int
>>main(int argc, const char **argv)
>>{
>> char *cp;
>> uint64_t value;
>>
>> if (argc < 2) return 1;
>>
>> value = strtoull(argv[1], &cp, 10);
>> if ((cp == argv[1])
>> || (*cp != '\0')) {
>> return 1;
>> }
>> return 0;
>>}
>>$ cc -o /tmp/a /tmp/a.c
>>$ /tmp/a 13254
>>$ echo $?
>>0
>>$ /tmp/a 23v23
>>$ echo $?
>>1
Back to comp.unix.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Bozo User <anthk@disroot.org> - 2024-09-30 20:04 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-09-30 21:04 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages usuario <anthk@disroot.org> - 2024-10-01 20:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-02 07:10 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages usuario <anthk@disroot.org> - 2024-10-02 12:52 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-02 16:00 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-09 22:25 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-10 08:38 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-10 16:09 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-10 15:34 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-10 17:55 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-10-10 19:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-10 21:31 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-10-11 00:09 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-11 15:47 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-11 15:15 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-11 15:45 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-11 15:59 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-11 16:28 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-12 08:39 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-12 13:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-10-12 14:50 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-10-12 15:32 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-10-12 15:51 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-12 16:36 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-13 08:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-13 14:29 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-13 14:03 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-13 16:21 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-13 14:56 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-13 13:43 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-13 14:54 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-13 17:17 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-13 15:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-13 16:02 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-13 18:28 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-13 21:10 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-14 01:16 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-14 01:45 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-14 14:13 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2024-10-14 07:47 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-14 14:27 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2024-10-14 23:25 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-14 21:03 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2024-10-14 23:26 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-14 08:23 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-14 14:36 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-10-14 14:58 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-14 14:59 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-10-14 17:23 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-10-15 13:27 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-15 15:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-14 21:04 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-13 20:15 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-14 08:25 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-14 13:38 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-14 14:47 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-10-14 14:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-10-14 17:27 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-14 17:55 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-14 17:43 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-13 21:09 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-13 21:08 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-10-13 15:08 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-13 15:52 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-10-13 17:20 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-13 20:29 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-10-14 01:20 +0100
Re: On overly rigid definitions (was Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-14 00:58 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-10-13 15:02 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-10-13 16:31 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-10-13 20:06 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-10-13 20:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-10-11 16:37 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-11 19:01 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-12 08:40 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-11 20:58 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-12 08:42 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-12 14:37 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> - 2024-10-12 17:49 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-13 08:20 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-13 21:25 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-10-12 20:50 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-12 21:25 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-13 08:22 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-13 20:33 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-10-11 00:07 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-11 16:15 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-11 08:17 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-11 19:37 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-11 01:33 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Eric Pozharski <apple.universe@posteo.net> - 2024-10-12 16:39 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-13 08:19 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-10-13 14:55 +0200
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-13 21:33 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-14 08:28 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-14 11:38 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-14 11:05 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-10-14 16:04 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-14 15:39 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-13 20:34 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Sebastian <sebastian@here.com.invalid> - 2024-11-11 07:31 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-11 10:06 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Wolfgang Agnes <wagnes@jemoni.to> - 2024-11-11 08:28 -0300
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-11-11 16:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-11 20:55 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 10:14 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-12 09:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 10:31 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-12 09:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 15:05 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-12 15:09 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Wolfgang Agnes <wagnes@jemoni.to> - 2024-11-12 13:47 -0300
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-11 21:24 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 10:23 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Wolfgang Agnes <wagnes@jemoni.to> - 2024-11-12 13:50 -0300
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-12 20:29 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) - 2024-11-19 18:43 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-20 04:34 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 08:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-20 11:51 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 11:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-20 16:38 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 16:38 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-20 17:54 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-20 10:03 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 08:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-21 07:56 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-21 14:13 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 16:06 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 08:13 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-21 07:58 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-20 17:50 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-21 14:40 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 15:07 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 13:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 15:41 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 15:52 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 17:35 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:43 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:43 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:17 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 17:48 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 18:12 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 18:48 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:05 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 19:24 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:46 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 17:26 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 23:06 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 22:49 -0500
[OT] Thunderbird Reply-button (was Re: <subject that has now for long nothing to do with the OP>) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-23 05:26 +0100
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button (was Re: <subject that has now for long nothing to do with the OP>) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-23 00:04 -0500
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-23 06:09 +0100
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-23 09:24 -0500
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-23 20:14 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-23 13:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-11-22 18:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-11-22 18:22 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 18:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 18:59 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:15 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 19:26 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:51 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages mas@a4.home - 2024-11-21 15:46 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-11-21 16:08 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 17:31 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2024-11-21 17:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 17:19 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 14:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 15:27 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 21:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 22:09 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 23:10 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 17:16 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 22:34 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 23:44 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-23 14:05 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-23 10:22 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-23 16:38 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 13:59 +0000
Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-27 14:35 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-27 14:56 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-27 16:14 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-27 15:07 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-27 23:09 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 23:22 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 00:44 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 23:56 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 00:11 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-27 21:22 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 19:48 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 20:30 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 21:07 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-29 09:50 +0000
Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-29 10:33 +0000
Re: Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-29 10:38 +0000
Re: Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 21:45 +0100
Re: Why TF? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-29 23:01 +0000
Re: Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-30 09:35 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-29 13:07 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-29 14:09 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-12-29 16:41 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Eric Pozharski <apple.universe@posteo.net> - 2024-12-29 17:56 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-29 18:59 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-29 22:19 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-30 19:31 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-30 18:10 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-30 23:11 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-02 03:40 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-02 16:29 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-02 19:36 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-03 02:55 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-03 18:15 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-01-04 10:12 +0000
OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2025-01-04 08:31 -0300
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-01-04 11:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-04 22:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2025-01-04 19:17 -0300
Re: OT: Windows Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 00:47 +0000
Re: OT: Windows Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2025-01-09 22:27 -0300
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-01-05 16:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-05 17:14 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-05 21:09 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 08:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 14:08 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 14:21 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 15:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 15:55 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 16:46 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-01-06 12:42 -0500
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 18:16 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2025-01-06 18:24 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 18:52 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 08:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 13:18 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 14:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 14:14 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 15:35 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:53 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 16:10 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 17:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:23 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:23 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 12:19 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 13:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2025-01-07 17:16 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2025-01-06 17:53 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 20:28 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 20:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2025-01-06 20:38 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-07 00:49 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-07 02:14 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-07 08:59 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-07 14:59 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-08 02:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-08 03:23 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-08 07:52 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 12:21 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-08 14:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 14:41 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 15:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 13:59 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-07 15:54 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:56 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-08 02:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 16:17 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2025-01-07 16:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 08:37 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 15:22 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 16:00 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 16:39 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 08:34 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 14:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:11 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 16:02 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 16:56 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:19 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:20 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 13:00 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 13:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-08 16:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-01-08 09:55 -0800
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 18:38 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-15 16:46 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-15 20:20 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-16 09:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-16 15:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-08 20:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-15 16:47 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-15 20:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-15 22:55 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-16 09:43 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-16 14:51 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-16 15:47 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-16 17:34 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-16 15:56 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-16 16:53 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-07 15:24 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:31 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-07 19:09 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:26 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-09 04:39 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 20:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 20:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 20:26 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 15:02 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 19:27 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-28 23:03 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-28 02:07 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 19:40 +0100
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-28 23:00 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 23:32 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2024-12-28 19:02 -0600
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-28 21:12 -0500
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-29 09:54 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-29 07:39 -0500
A herd of elephants (Was: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-29 14:32 +0000
Re: A herd of elephants (Was: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 22:03 +0100
Re: A herd of elephants (Was: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able) Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-29 19:49 -0500
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 21:55 +0100
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 22:07 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-12-28 14:26 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 21:10 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-27 13:11 -0500
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-27 23:11 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-27 14:56 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 23:22 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-12-27 07:43 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-12-27 17:39 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-27 13:15 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-12-27 19:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 00:38 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 12:14 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 11:56 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 20:33 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-11-21 19:12 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-22 10:09 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-11-22 18:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-11-23 11:40 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 12:17 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-11-22 18:19 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 20:20 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Ed Morton <mortonspam@gmail.com> - 2024-11-20 05:46 -0600
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 12:27 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-20 21:43 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 08:15 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-21 22:05 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 12:47 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-22 20:41 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-20 16:53 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Ed Morton <mortonspam@gmail.com> - 2024-11-23 18:17 -0600
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-20 12:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) - 2024-11-21 05:38 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 17:01 +0000
csiph-web