Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Aargh! Don't do this! |
| Date | 2016-04-06 13:20 -0700 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <ln60vupjzh.fsf@kst-u.example.com> (permalink) |
| References | (16 earlier) <8e2e74d5-b18b-4cc9-8857-ee5c749179d1@googlegroups.com> <lnpou2pw4y.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <8091d70d-fe73-4be6-8f65-036a4a69d10f@googlegroups.com> <lnh9fepo55.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <d4d301c8-70fa-470c-9fe7-73204e3d3640@googlegroups.com> |
supercat@casperkitty.com writes:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 1:51:01 PM UTC-5, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> You wrote about "yield"ing certain specific values. Did you mean the
>> result of the expression x*x, or the value stored in y? Or do you
>> expect them to be the same?
>
> In the case of something like a compiler for the TMS3205x, which is a DSP
> that has a 16-bit "int", and has two 32-bit accumulators along with
> instructions to (among other things) load, add, or subtract x<<n for any n
> 0 to 16 *inclusive*, as well as instructions to store the top or bottom
> half of the accumulator, add, subtract, store, compare, or swap the primary
> and secondary accumulators [is that concrete enough for you?] an expression
> like x+y < z (with all values being 16-bit int) would be evaluated by loading
> x, adding y, subtracting z, and checking the sign of the 32-bit accumulator.
> An expression like int1+int2+long1 would be evaluated by loading int1,
> adding int2, adding the low half of long1, and adding the high half of long1.
> The multiplier takes 17-bit signed operands (for signed multiply, the upper
> bit matches that of the operands; for unsigned, it's forced to zero) and
> yields a 32-bit result that can be added to the accumulator.
>
> I don't know whether there are any cases where the compiler would use the
> secondary accumulator to hold an "int" variable, but I wouldn't consider it
> astonishing if it did so. In any case, intermediate results of expression
> are generally not lopped off to 16 bits.
That's concrete, but not in a way that I care about. (No reason you
shouldn't, but for purposes of the current discussion I don't.)
A concrete example would be a self-contained C program whose output
demonstrates the issue you're talking about, and the program's actual
output, along with whatever information is needed about the compiler,
options, and target system. If stdio output is not possible because
it's an embedded system, an alternative description of the program's
behavior would be fine. (The value stored in a variable is not
"behavior"; displaying that value is.)
[...]
>> And you suggest that having
>> int x = ...;
>> long y = x*x;
>> store a value outside the range of int is useful.
>
> I would suggest that most programs which receive input from potentially-
> untrustworthy sources are subject to the following semantics:
>
> 1. When given valid input, yield valid output.
>
> 2. Even when given invalid input, don't format hard drives, launch nuclear
> missiles, etc.
>
> I would suggest that any code which relies upon "y" holding any *particular*
> value outside the range of "int" is broken, but that forcing y to hold only
> values in the range of "int" may make the program slower than it would be
> if the compiler were allowed to store anything it liked into the upper bits
> of y.
As I've said, given that the mathematical result of x*x is outside the
range of int, the code has undefined behavior. You want to restrict the
scope of that behavior -- which is fine, if you can specify that
restriction.
You gave a specific example of storing 250000 in y, where that value is
outside the range of int. I inferred that you were saying that *that
specific behavior* is something you'd find useful. If all you're saying
is that nasal demons and missile launches should be avoided, I can stop
wasting my time on the specific example you raised.
[...]
>> > How about
>> >
>> > for (int i=0; i<top; i+=2;) ...
>> >
>> > It's not uncommon for compilers to generate code which, if top==INT_MAX,
>> > will exit following the iteration where i==INT_MAX-1. Under an abstract-
>> > machine model where the value stored in "i" is allowed to arbitrarily
>> > behave as either INT_MIN or a value one larger than INT_MAX [meaning that
>> > the comparison may arbitrarily yield true or false], such a transform
>> > would be legitimate.
>>
>> That's hardly a concrete example, nor does it match the "y = x*x" code
>> we were talking about.
>
> You were asking about situations where an "int" variable holds values
> outside the range of "int"; I would say the above loop behaves as if it
> does.
Not on any system I've tried. With a similar example, the value simply
wraps around to large negative values within the range of int.
Given that the behavior is undefined, I of course agree that it *could*
in principle behave as if the value of i is outside the range of int.
I'm asking you to demonstrate that that actually happens.
>> I would be at least mildly surprised by a compiler that behaves as you
>> describe. The most likely result would be an infinite loop, with i
>> wrapping to negative values. I certainly wouldn't expect a value stored
>> in an int object to be treated as if it were outside the range of int.
>
> On a platform which documents that integer variables always wrap, a compiler
> would be required by virtue of such documentation to loop infinitely (or
> until an interior break occurs) in the case where top equals INT_MAX. For
> the compiler to stop after (INT_MAX+1u)/2 iterations would be inconsistent
> with the documented wrapping behavior. Enabling loop optimizations, however,
> would on many platforms (including the TMS32050) cause the compiler to
> pre-compute the number of iterations. In the case of the 32050 compiler,
> the value would be loaded into a hardware "loop-count" register for use
> in conjunction with a hardware looping instruction (which loads the start
> and end addresses of the loop into two more hardware registers; any time
> code reaches the loop-end address and the counter is non-zero, the program
> counter will be loaded with the loop-start address and the counter will be
> decremented, without having to waste any time executing decrement or branch
> instructions).
Ok, that's a bit closer to the kind of concrete example I was asking
about, but it's still not there (see above).
>> > I've seen the types of transformations above, even on compilers which never,
>> > so far as I can tell, generate code which would be inconsistent with the
>> > semantics I describe. Thus, I would consider such behavior "pre-existing".
>>
>> Concrete example, please.
>
> See above.
I did.
>> This is quite different from what you were talking about above. In the
>> "y = x*x" example, you suggested that the value stored in y might be
>> well outside the range of int (500*500 resulting in 250000, where int is
>> 16 bits and 25000 requires at least 18). Now you're presenting a
>> different example where the mathematical value is outside the range of
>> int but within the range of unsigned int.
>
>> I don't know of, and do not propose to spend time finding, a compiler
>> where that program produces different output. (All compilers I
>> currently have access to have 32-bit int.)
>
> Storing into an unsigned int a computation which yields a result that is
> between INT_MAX+1u and UINT_MAX will *almost* always work, but in gcc it
> will sometimes fail.
[citation needed]
I would posit that the notion that a two's-complement
> compiler shouldn't *always* yield arithmetically-correct code in such cases
> is a relatively new innovation which deliberately disregards years of
> precedent. If 100% of compilers for two's-complement machines implement
> such code as expected, the code will never be ported to anything other than
> a two's-complement machine, and compiler writers will never cease honoring
> the precedent, then a cast to unsigned before the operation would represent
> unnecessary verbosity.
But such code would depend on semantics not defined (and in fact
explicitly left undefined) by the C standard.
> I'm wondering at what point it would have become unreasonable to expect that
> compiler writers for two's-complement machines would always and forevermore
> continue to honor historical precedent.
I'd say about 1989, but maybe that's just me.
>> So, can you provide (a) a specific C program along with its actual
>> output that illustrates the point you're making, and (b) a description,
>> potentially suitable for inclusion in a future standard, of the behavior
>> you want?
>
> I've posted before a program where gcc determines that a loop will execute
> at least once, and the second iteration would compute and store into an
> unsigned int a value between INT_MAX+1 and UINT_MAX, and gcc consequently
> decides that the loop will always run exactly once. Do you need me to find
> it again?
Yes, please -- but that doesn't cover the other example about y being
outside the range of int.
> As for what I would propose, I would introduce the concept of an N-bit
> signed integer type holding a Partially-Indeterminate Value, whose N lower
> bits are arithmetically correct but whose upper bits may behave as any
> mathematical integer which may or may not be within the range of any type
> supported by the compiler. Signed integer overflow yields a partially-
> indeterminate value, and most operations on partially-indeterminate values
> yield other partially-indeterminate values. Assuming "int" is 32 bits and
> "long long" is 64...
>
> int x=INT_MAX+1;
> unsigned long long ull1 = x;
> unsigned long long ull2 = x;
> long long ll1 = x;
> long long ll2 = x;
>
> ull1 and ull2 would behave as "normal" values whose lower 32 bits held the
> value 10000..000 and whose upper bits were unspecified and may or may not
> match. ll1 and ll2 would be Partially-Indeterminate values whose lower
> 32 bits would hold the same value as ull1 and ull2, whose next 32 bits
> would hold Unspecified values, but which could behave as thought hey had
> additional upper bits beyond.
>
> If either operand to a relational operator is a PIV, the operator may yield
> 0 or 1 in Unspecified fashion. An equality comparison between two values
> whose defined bits don't match will always report unequal; if either operand
> is a PIV and all defined bits match, the comparison may yield 0 or 1 in
> Unspecified fashion.
>
> If an overflow occurs in a computation stored to a variable which is used
> *in the evaluation of a for-loop condition* or the computation of *a variable
> thus used*, a compiler may generate code which would result in the loop
> exiting early--even before the iteration where the overflow would have
> occurred--but this is the only case in which overflow behavior is not bound
> by time or causality. [I'm not sure if the TMS compiler would need this
> allowance, but some others would, and I don't think it unreasonable].
>
> Such a behavioral spec would be consistent with what I've observed from the
> TMS32050 compiler, and would also be consistent with many of the less
> aggressive loop optimizations that are employed by modern compilers on more
> commonplace platforms.
Hmm. I don't have time to study all that right now. My initial
impression is that it would make it very difficult for most people to
understand C semantics.
--
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"
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-02-18 08:35 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 08:48 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-02-18 22:21 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! guinness.tony@gmail.com - 2016-02-19 03:11 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-02-19 13:49 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-02-19 10:24 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-02-19 17:00 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-02-19 12:08 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-19 12:15 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-02-19 11:06 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-19 11:53 -0600
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 10:58 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-02-24 09:40 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 10:24 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 10:31 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-02-25 06:52 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2016-02-20 00:44 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-02-24 16:28 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-25 20:17 +1300
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-02-25 10:41 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-25 02:54 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Randy Howard <rhoward.mx@EverybodyUsesIt.com> - 2016-02-25 10:26 -0600
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-03-01 09:44 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-03-01 09:26 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 10:08 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-01 11:01 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 11:37 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-01 12:15 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 12:44 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-02 15:27 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-02 14:41 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-02 23:35 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-03 16:44 +1300
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-03 01:09 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-01 13:10 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 19:56 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-03-01 23:13 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-03-05 10:30 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-03-01 23:00 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 01:12 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-02-25 11:16 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-25 11:02 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-25 03:21 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-25 12:02 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-02-25 13:19 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-02-25 20:32 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-25 21:55 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-02-25 14:44 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-25 23:41 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-02-25 17:44 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-26 02:03 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-02-25 19:34 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-02-25 22:27 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-02-26 11:59 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-02-25 23:57 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-26 01:29 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-02-25 18:19 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-02-26 11:46 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-26 12:25 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-02-26 21:11 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-02-26 12:41 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-02-25 19:50 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-02-26 17:29 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-02-26 19:33 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-02-26 20:43 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-26 11:03 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-02-26 19:56 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-26 21:04 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-02-26 13:13 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-26 19:33 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-02-26 21:16 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-02-26 12:59 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-03-03 08:20 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2016-02-26 01:02 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-02-26 19:35 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-26 19:09 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-02-26 12:27 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2016-02-26 19:53 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-02-27 08:26 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-27 16:56 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-02-27 10:27 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-02-26 19:49 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2016-02-26 19:56 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2016-02-26 19:58 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-03-01 14:38 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-03-02 11:02 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-02 13:27 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-03-02 16:40 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 20:28 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-03-05 14:44 -0800
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-06 12:00 +1300
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-03-07 21:42 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-03-16 10:41 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-21 18:13 +1300
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-03-21 10:10 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-03-21 07:55 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-03-21 13:23 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-03-21 08:56 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-21 09:20 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-03-21 21:18 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-03-21 13:36 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2016-03-21 14:28 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-03-21 17:49 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-03-22 11:37 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-03-22 11:53 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-03-22 13:35 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-22 12:43 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2016-03-22 07:01 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-22 12:16 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-22 12:40 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-03-22 12:51 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-22 13:32 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-03-22 15:49 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-22 19:20 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-22 21:30 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-22 21:52 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2016-03-22 18:02 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-22 22:07 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-22 22:28 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-22 22:47 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-22 23:05 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-22 16:43 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-23 00:33 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-03-22 20:44 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-23 01:10 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-23 01:23 +0000
AWK's 'for' loop (Was: Aargh! Don't do this!) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-03-23 05:30 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-03-23 08:18 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-03-23 23:43 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-22 18:13 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-23 14:33 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-23 15:02 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-23 19:09 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-23 21:18 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-23 14:54 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-03-23 22:21 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-23 22:42 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-23 22:41 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 00:43 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-24 00:54 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 21:26 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 11:43 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-24 01:43 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 02:47 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-24 10:30 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 03:54 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 11:54 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 05:31 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 13:04 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-24 13:16 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-24 13:12 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-24 06:24 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-24 13:46 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 07:05 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 07:02 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 14:44 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-24 15:00 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 15:31 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-24 15:36 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Randy Howard <rhoward.mx@EverybodyUsesIt.com> - 2016-03-24 11:22 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 16:54 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-03-24 13:05 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2016-03-24 13:43 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-03-24 13:51 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-24 17:00 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 17:31 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 18:26 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-24 21:19 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-25 01:18 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-25 11:21 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-03-25 12:07 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jos V <xjosx@xjosaphatx.co> - 2016-03-26 15:19 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-26 19:40 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-26 14:35 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-26 22:11 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-24 11:18 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-24 11:13 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-25 09:26 +1300
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-25 01:16 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-03-25 14:16 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-25 06:54 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-03-25 15:43 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-25 11:10 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-26 19:29 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-03-24 11:00 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-24 16:12 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2016-04-12 21:58 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-04-15 19:13 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Randy Howard <rhoward.mx@EverybodyUsesIt.com> - 2016-03-24 11:19 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-24 11:06 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 19:43 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-24 16:05 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-24 10:28 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-03-25 11:49 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 11:43 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-23 01:15 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 01:32 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 12:53 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-23 00:07 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-03-23 11:41 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-23 10:16 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! jadill33@gmail.com - 2016-03-23 11:55 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-03-30 11:04 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 18:48 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-24 19:03 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Randy Howard <rhoward.mx@EverybodyUsesIt.com> - 2016-03-24 14:15 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-24 12:18 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-26 19:20 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-25 01:04 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-03-25 12:26 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-26 19:28 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-25 11:18 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-25 18:04 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-03-25 12:17 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-25 12:49 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-26 07:14 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-26 07:23 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-25 23:54 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-26 10:16 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-26 10:35 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-26 03:04 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-26 10:18 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-26 10:24 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2016-03-26 11:28 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-26 19:33 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-26 16:13 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-24 12:11 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-03-24 12:36 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-24 21:21 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-24 15:25 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-24 22:40 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-24 16:21 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-25 13:53 +1300
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-25 01:23 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-25 16:23 +1300
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-25 01:25 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-03-24 19:09 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-03-30 11:25 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-25 12:25 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-25 14:06 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-25 08:44 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-25 16:02 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-25 09:21 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-25 18:40 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-26 19:42 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-03-26 15:49 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-26 20:22 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-03-26 21:34 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Randy Howard <rhoward.mx@EverybodyUsesIt.com> - 2016-03-26 19:36 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-26 21:43 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-03-27 04:43 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-03-25 15:47 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-03-24 23:17 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-03-22 15:48 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-03-30 14:37 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-03-30 17:58 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-03-31 08:47 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-04-05 11:10 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-04-05 11:18 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-04-06 09:38 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-06 18:18 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-04-06 10:48 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-07 00:34 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-04-06 17:23 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-07 11:38 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-04-07 11:49 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-07 12:10 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-04-07 12:12 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-07 12:35 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-04-07 19:42 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-04-07 18:51 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-08 02:14 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-04-08 02:41 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2016-04-08 16:13 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-04-08 22:20 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2016-04-08 21:51 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-09 02:54 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-08 22:47 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 15:29 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-09 10:51 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 19:12 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-09 11:45 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 01:27 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-09 12:34 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 01:47 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-09 13:19 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 11:04 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-09 22:46 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 12:22 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 04:57 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 05:41 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-10 12:31 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-10 02:22 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-10 21:21 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-04-09 21:40 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-10 21:25 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-04-10 10:20 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 04:40 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 13:55 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 06:15 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 14:43 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 06:56 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 17:29 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 09:57 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! mrs@kithrup.com (Mike Stump) - 2016-04-29 07:57 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-29 20:23 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-29 11:32 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-29 23:38 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-29 13:15 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-30 16:32 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-04-29 23:54 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-30 11:15 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-30 22:32 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-04-30 09:41 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-01 00:33 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-30 11:31 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-04-30 09:06 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-30 15:09 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-01 00:32 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-01 10:54 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-04-09 13:58 +0200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 05:18 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 13:37 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 05:46 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 14:07 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 06:28 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 07:14 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-04-09 15:27 +0200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 20:43 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Randy Howard <rhoward.mx@EverybodyUsesIt.com> - 2016-04-09 13:37 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2016-04-10 01:43 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 01:03 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-04-08 22:22 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-08 11:46 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-08 11:30 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-04-08 11:48 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 07:37 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-04-08 14:19 +0200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-04-08 13:40 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 08:40 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-08 16:52 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 12:47 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-08 17:40 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 12:51 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-04-08 18:26 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-08 20:37 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-04-09 15:38 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-09 16:52 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-04-09 22:33 +0200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-04-14 07:18 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-04-14 14:26 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-04-14 09:44 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-15 13:41 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-05-03 11:21 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-03 20:12 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-05-05 09:40 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-05 18:04 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-05 11:01 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-05-08 09:16 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-08 10:48 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-05-08 11:10 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-08 04:59 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-08 13:18 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-08 18:53 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-08 19:09 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-08 19:38 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-08 20:07 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-08 20:33 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-08 21:11 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-08 21:51 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-08 14:45 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-09 00:45 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-05-08 21:17 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-05-08 19:40 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-09 00:42 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-05-09 09:07 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-09 10:48 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2016-05-09 08:57 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-09 00:31 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-09 11:54 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-09 10:50 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-09 11:35 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-09 20:30 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-09 13:44 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-09 14:08 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-09 15:09 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-09 15:21 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-09 21:26 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 06:59 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 02:24 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-10 08:50 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 09:32 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-10 18:12 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 13:28 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-05-13 16:12 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-10 11:11 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-05-10 19:00 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 06:57 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-09 22:48 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-09 15:13 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-10 00:45 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 07:01 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-10 11:44 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 04:20 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-10 16:03 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 08:08 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 08:09 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-11 01:17 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 08:47 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-11 01:04 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 20:20 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 21:06 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-10 21:56 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-11 13:58 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-11 12:31 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-11 06:17 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-11 19:50 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-11 20:45 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-11 21:15 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-11 22:42 -0700
Pronouns (Was: Aargh! Don't do this!) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-05-11 20:31 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-11 08:31 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-11 17:00 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-11 08:34 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-09 08:59 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-09 17:43 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-05-09 09:55 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-09 10:57 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-05-09 07:40 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-08 14:39 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 02:43 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-15 03:12 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 04:28 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-05-22 13:39 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-22 10:00 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-05-22 17:15 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-05-22 18:47 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-23 01:15 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-05-23 22:01 +1200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-23 03:59 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-05-23 09:06 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-23 06:35 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-05-23 16:56 +0200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-05-23 16:55 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-23 18:08 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-23 10:24 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-23 21:55 -0500
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-05-23 23:16 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-05-23 22:51 +0200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-24 10:32 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-05-26 11:17 +0200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-05-23 16:31 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-05-10 06:20 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-10 14:56 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-05-14 10:36 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-05-10 14:02 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-05-05 11:08 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-05-05 19:21 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-04-07 03:52 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-04-07 12:10 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-04-09 15:48 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-07 12:14 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-04-10 11:46 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-10 14:25 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-04-10 15:53 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-10 17:00 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-04-10 20:01 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-10 20:28 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-04-11 00:40 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-11 11:47 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-04-11 11:53 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-04-11 04:39 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-11 13:15 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-11 14:14 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-11 14:28 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-15 12:37 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-04-15 08:10 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-15 16:33 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-15 16:29 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-15 16:50 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-04-15 16:39 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-16 12:29 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-04-16 14:02 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-04-16 20:56 +0200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2016-04-23 10:28 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-15 18:00 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-15 18:21 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-04-15 11:30 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-15 20:56 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-04-15 14:30 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-04-15 21:33 +0000
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-15 23:23 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-04-15 15:33 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-04-15 19:38 -0400
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-15 21:22 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-15 21:41 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-15 22:50 +0100
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-04-11 16:44 +0200
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-04-11 09:00 -0700
Re: Aargh! Don't do this! David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-04-11 18:47 +0200
(Thread has 770 articles, showing 500 — browse group in flat view)
csiph-web