Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.spitfire.i.gajendra.net!not-for-mail
From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.c++,alt.comp.lang.rust,alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=9CThe?= end of software secrecy is almost upon
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2026 17:14:18 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID: <11bldda$ba7$1@reader2.panix.com>
References: <11amvre$15far$1@dont-email.me> <11bl9qm$10h8f$1@dont-email.me> <11bla34$fid$1@reader2.panix.com> <11blaui$2q6vd$1@dont-email.me>
Injection-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2026 17:14:18 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader2.panix.com; posting-host="spitfire.i.gajendra.net:166.84.136.80"; logging-data="11591"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Originator: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Xref: csiph.com rec.arts.sf.written:661489 comp.lang.fortran:126990 comp.lang.c++:125345 alt.comp.lang.rust:440 alt.folklore.computers:236050

In article <11blaui$2q6vd$1@dont-email.me>,  <boltar@caprica.universe> wrote:
>On Sun, 25 Oct 2026 16:17:40 -0000 (UTC)
>cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) gabbled:
>>>> [snip]
>>>>You didn't answer my questions.
>>>>
>>>>What do you think that a "thread" is?
>>>>What do you think that a "process" is?
>>>
>>>Stop playing games - you don't get to answer a question
>with a question.
>>
>>In other words, you don't know.
>
>Oh do piss off you bore, i'm not going to humour you while
>you try to unpaint
>yourself from a corner. You clearly have no idea why C++
>implements one API
>but not the other but you wanted to try and sound clever
>anyway. Whoops, didn't
>turn out quite how you expected did it?

Actually, it "turned out" juat about exactly as I expected it
would.

>>>In the meantime I'll ask one last time - why do you think
>C++ can provide
>>>a threading wrapper API but not a multi process one?
>>
>>You've got system(), right?  What, precisely, do you want this
>
>system?? ROTFL!! :)
>
>Oh dear, you really have no clue!

You're snotty little attitude aside, I note that you can't even
arriculate what, exactly, it is that you want.  "Argument by
insult" seems about par for the course here, but using that to
hide your ignorance both doesn't work and makes you look
incredbily insecure.

Anyway, go ahead and keep flailing.  Ta!

	- Dan C.