Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #14821 > unrolled thread

copy/pass a va_list to another thread

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++

Contents

  copy/pass a va_list to another thread Christopher <cpisz@austin.rr.com> - 2012-03-07 14:36 -0800
    Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-03-08 02:04 +0100
      Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Christopher <cpisz@austin.rr.com> - 2012-03-08 11:54 -0800
        Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-03-08 21:41 +0100
          Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Christopher <cpisz@austin.rr.com> - 2012-03-08 13:56 -0800
            OT: Free Usenet Access red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2012-03-08 16:09 -0800
              Re: OT: Free Usenet Access Christopher Pisz <someone@somewhere.net> - 2012-03-09 10:26 -0600
            New Google Groups problems (was Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread) Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-03-09 12:27 +0000
            Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Robert Miles <milesrf@Usenet-News.net> - 2012-04-21 23:43 -0500
              XSUsenet.COM  @Jeff-Relf.Me - 2012-04-21 22:12 -0700
          Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-03-10 05:12 +0900
            Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-03-10 00:00 +0100
              Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-03-10 08:40 +0900
                Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-03-10 08:42 +0900
                MIME (Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread) Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-03-10 07:04 +0000
                  Re: MIME (Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread) Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-03-10 16:56 +0900
                    Re: MIME (Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread) Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-03-11 07:37 +0000
                Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-03-10 10:44 +0100
                  Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-03-10 14:43 +0000
                    Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-03-10 21:17 +0100
                  Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-03-11 10:49 +0900
                    Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-03-11 07:11 +0000
                      Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-03-11 19:03 +0900
                        Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-03-11 11:49 +0000
                          Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-03-11 23:01 +0900
                            Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-03-11 18:25 +0100
                            Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-03-11 23:53 +0000
              Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Mike McCarty <mcmccarty@gmail.com> - 2012-03-10 05:47 -0800
                Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-03-10 19:51 +0100
                  Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-03-10 21:23 +0100
                    Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-03-11 14:36 +0100
                      Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-03-11 18:33 +0100
                        Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-03-11 20:41 +0100
                          Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-03-11 21:49 +0100
                    Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-03-11 17:18 +0000
                      Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-03-11 18:39 +0100
                        Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-03-11 18:54 +0000
                        Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2012-03-12 19:03 +0100
                Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-03-11 17:09 +0000
            Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-03-11 01:26 +0000
              Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-03-11 11:18 +0900
                Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-03-11 16:41 +0000
        Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-03-08 23:07 +0000
        Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2012-03-08 23:17 -0600
        Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Stuart Redmann <DerTopper@web.de> - 2012-03-10 05:10 -0800
        Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-03-10 05:42 -0800
        Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread Robert Miles <milesrf@Usenet-News.net> - 2012-04-21 23:20 -0500
    Re: copy/pass a va_list to another thread BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-08 09:25 -0700

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#14875

"Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>>> But there are people using e.g. Thunderbird as newsreader, and as of
>>> 2012 Thunderbird treats a quoted printable paragraph as one long
>>> single line.
>>
>> Quoted-printable is a _transfer encoding_, and shouldn't affect the way
>> the article content is displayed by your newsreader.... and indeed,
>> looking at the article you're complaining about, the problem isn't with
>> quoted-printable at all, it's that the original article doesn't have
>> any newlines in its paragraphs.
>
> That is incorrect.

What is incorrect?

Let's look at what I said; I said three things:

(1) "Quoted-printable is a _transfer encoding_."

That's obviously true -- note the header where QP is enabled:
   "Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable"

(2) "It shouldn't affect the way the article content is displayed by
    your newsreader."

This is true, simply by the meaning of a "transfer encoding" -- an
encoding which is intended to avoid problems in transit, but which is
entirely undone before the mail/news-reader interprets the underlying
text.  It is intended to make sure the underlying text is
transparently transferred.

(3) "... looking at the article you're complaining about, the problem
    isn't with quoted-printable at all, it's that the original article
    doesn't have any newlines in its paragraphs."

This is can be verified by examination.  Here's a paragraph from the
QP-encoded form of the original article:

   Maybe. I am hoping for some boost or C++ standard mechanism, which I haven'=
   t heard of yet, that solves this problem that I presume many developers hav=
   e run across, when dealing with a function that takes a variable argument l=
   ist parameter.

Notice that there's a "=" at the end of each line?  In the QP
encoding, that means "remove this newline", and is only used if the
_original_ text had a line which was "too long".

Thus in the sender's original text, that whole paragraph was one long
line.  QP split that long line into short lines for transfer, and when
the receiver undoes the QP-encoding, the original long line is
restored -- but note that the problem is that the long line was there
in the first place, which is a problem that is orthogonal to the
transfer-encoding used.

After the QP-encoding is _removed_, the original paragraph should look
like this:

   Maybe. I am hoping for some boost or C++ standard mechanism, which I haven't heard of yet, that solves this problem that I presume many developers have run across, when dealing with a function that takes a variable argument list parameter.

We'll see what my software does with this, but what you end up seeing
should have no connection with the transfer encoding, because the
latter is intended to be transparent.

>> should really be addressed at the fact that the sender's software
>> didn't wrap lines, not that it used quoted-printable to encode
>> those long lines.
>
> That is dumb.

Wait, that's your argument...?

A little more detail, perhaps?

>> Here:  as a test, I'll try to make sure my newsreader uses
>> quoted-printable, and you can tell me if you have problems reading it
>> or not.  My lines are properly wrapped.
>
> You are posting with text/plain, not quoted printable

Sorry, I tried to make my software use QP, but failed to do so (note
my followup to my previous message).

> and your paragraphs are not paragraphs but individual lines.

Yes, that's what I meant by "My lines are properly wrapped."

In other words, I made sure that my post was in a reasonably standard
form for news (shortish lines) _before_ it was sent; if QP had been
applied on top (I tried...), it wouldn't have made any difference.

-miles

-- 
Fast, small, soon; pick any 2.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14879

On Sun, 2012-03-11, Miles Bader wrote:
> "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> writes:
...
>> That is incorrect.
>
> What is incorrect?
>
> Let's look at what I said; I said three things:
...
> (2) "It shouldn't affect the way the article content is displayed by
>     your newsreader."
>
> This is true, simply by the meaning of a "transfer encoding" -- an
> encoding which is intended to avoid problems in transit, but which is
> entirely undone before the mail/news-reader interprets the underlying
> text.  It is intended to make sure the underlying text is
> transparently transferred.

As I've said elsewhere in the thread, this is debatable since no RFC
specified MIME for NetNews until 2005. I still don't understand Alf's
position, but I'm guessing the difference lies here.

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14881

Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> writes:
>> (2) "It shouldn't affect the way the article content is displayed by
>>     your newsreader."
>>
>> This is true, simply by the meaning of a "transfer encoding" -- an
>> encoding which is intended to avoid problems in transit, but which is
>> entirely undone before the mail/news-reader interprets the underlying
>> text.  It is intended to make sure the underlying text is
>> transparently transferred.
>
> As I've said elsewhere in the thread, this is debatable since no RFC
> specified MIME for NetNews until 2005. I still don't understand Alf's
> position, but I'm guessing the difference lies here.

What's debatable?  The meaning of "transfer encoding" is clear enough
for software that support MIME, so the crucial question is whether
both the sender and receiver support it or not -- and in this
particular case, they appear to (Alf is using Thunderbird, which
certainly claims to support MIME, and the sender's mail appears to
have been correctly MIME-encoded).

-miles

-- 
One of the lessons of history is that nothing is often a good thing to
do, and always a clever thing to say.  -- Will Durant

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14883

On Sun, 2012-03-11, Miles Bader wrote:
> Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> writes:
>>> (2) "It shouldn't affect the way the article content is displayed by
>>>     your newsreader."
>>>
>>> This is true, simply by the meaning of a "transfer encoding" -- an
>>> encoding which is intended to avoid problems in transit, but which is
>>> entirely undone before the mail/news-reader interprets the underlying
>>> text.  It is intended to make sure the underlying text is
>>> transparently transferred.
>>
>> As I've said elsewhere in the thread, this is debatable since no RFC
>> specified MIME for NetNews until 2005. I still don't understand Alf's
>> position, but I'm guessing the difference lies here.
>
> What's debatable?

It's debatable if quoted-printable should affect the way the article
content is displayed by a newsreader. If it doesn't support MIME it
will look one way; if it does support MIME it will look another way.

> The meaning of "transfer encoding" is clear enough
> for software that support MIME, so the crucial question is whether
> both the sender and receiver support it or not -- and in this
> particular case, they appear to (Alf is using Thunderbird, which
> certainly claims to support MIME, and the sender's mail appears to
> have been correctly MIME-encoded).

I was under the impression that we were discussing posting formats in
general, not just what Alf sees. But I may be mistaken.

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14885

Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> writes:
> It's debatable if quoted-printable should affect the way the article
> content is displayed by a newsreader. If it doesn't support MIME it
> will look one way; if it does support MIME it will look another way.

Er, well, sure.  The "should" is what the protocol specifies; clearly
newsreaders that don't support the protocol at all won't follow such
rules... :)

>> The meaning of "transfer encoding" is clear enough
>> for software that support MIME, so the crucial question is whether
>> both the sender and receiver support it or not -- and in this
>> particular case, they appear to (Alf is using Thunderbird, which
>> certainly claims to support MIME, and the sender's mail appears to
>> have been correctly MIME-encoded).
>
> I was under the impression that we were discussing posting formats in
> general, not just what Alf sees. But I may be mistaken.

Certainly Alf's original complaint was phrased generally (though
against QP in particular, not against using MIME).  But he then later
explained that he was annoyed because thunderbird was showing the
paragraphs in the complained-about article as long unwrapped lines.
Of course, that has nothing to do with QP, but how the original sender
formatted his article (prior to it being encoded by his software).

Anyway, I'm not really even sure what the actual argument is
anymore....  [Nothing to do with C++, that's for sure!  :]

-miles

-- 
Monday, n. In Christian countries, the day after the baseball game.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14890

On 11.03.2012 15:01, Miles Bader wrote:
>
> Certainly Alf's original complaint was phrased generally (though
> against QP in particular, not against using MIME).  But he then later
> explained that he was annoyed because thunderbird was showing the
> paragraphs in the complained-about article as long unwrapped lines.
> Of course, that has nothing to do with QP, but how the original sender
> formatted his article (prior to it being encoded by his software).
>
> Anyway, I'm not really even sure what the actual argument is
> anymore....  [Nothing to do with C++, that's for sure!  :]

First and foremost the case against QP on news is just that you *can't 
expect* QP to work on news, because (1) QP really sucks, and (2) 
therefore, it was not supported for news articles until September had 
already been going on for a long while, and therefore, (3) newsreaders 
such as Thunderbird don't support it properly, causing real problems.

But it's also about other things such as readability where QP is not 
supported, and the sheer idiocy of gobbledegook-encoding text that would 
be all OK without that extra and needless encoding.

This should not be hard to understand or remember. However, in the old 
days Microsoft fanboys often trolled by posting with QP and VCard info. 
Then the *nix and fanboys responded by posting with digital signatures. 
The Microsofties' QP postings appeared broken in the *nix fanboys' 
newsreaders. The *nix fanboys' postings did not appear at all in 
Microsoft's Outlook Express (now Windows Mail). So it was a bit of fun 
for while, both sides had a technical means to at least frustrate the 
other side a little. Still, anyone posting today with QP, or with 
digital signature, is either clueless, or a troll, or has no tools.

Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14899

On Sun, 2012-03-11, Miles Bader wrote:
...
> Anyway, I'm not really even sure what the actual argument is
> anymore....  [Nothing to do with C++, that's for sure!  :]

Agreed; this doesn't lead anywhere and most of the c.l.c++ activity
has been in this thread for several days. I'd post something on-topic,
but I have no C++ problems at the moment ...

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14868

On Friday, March 9, 2012 5:00:54 PM UTC-6, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> However, that ungood treatment of this archaic 7-bit format in one of 
> the few surviving newsreaders (Thunderbird) is just one example of how 
> quoted printable really really sucks.

I've never used it but it sounds like Thunderbird is what really really sucks,
being unable to reasonably display an "archaic" format like 
quoted-printable.

Word-wrap is hardly a novel concept.  I was using newsreaders in 1992 that
were capable of it (I know because people bitched about this problem then too).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14871

Op 10-Mar-12 14:47, Mike McCarty schreef:
> On Friday, March 9, 2012 5:00:54 PM UTC-6, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>> However, that ungood treatment of this archaic 7-bit format in one of
>> the few surviving newsreaders (Thunderbird) is just one example of how
>> quoted printable really really sucks.
>
> I've never used it but it sounds like Thunderbird is what really really sucks,
> being unable to reasonably display an "archaic" format like
> quoted-printable.
>
> Word-wrap is hardly a novel concept.  I was using newsreaders in 1992 that
> were capable of it (I know because people bitched about this problem then too).

Christophers posting looks just fine on the version of Thunderbird I'm 
using.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14873

On 10.03.2012 19:51, Dombo wrote:
> Op 10-Mar-12 14:47, Mike McCarty schreef:
>> On Friday, March 9, 2012 5:00:54 PM UTC-6, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>> However, that ungood treatment of this archaic 7-bit format in one of
>>> the few surviving newsreaders (Thunderbird) is just one example of how
>>> quoted printable really really sucks.
>>
>> I've never used it but it sounds like Thunderbird is what really
>> really sucks,
>> being unable to reasonably display an "archaic" format like
>> quoted-printable.
>>
>> Word-wrap is hardly a novel concept. I was using newsreaders in 1992 that
>> were capable of it (I know because people bitched about this problem
>> then too).
>
> Christophers posting looks just fine on the version of Thunderbird I'm
> using.

Since you know that what you're saying is wrong (since you're using the 
exact same version of Thunderbird as I am), why are you posting this as 
an unqualified general assertion instead of posting it is as a question 
about what you're failing to check or failing to look at?

Not that an answer to that will do much good; I'm not actually seeking 
an answer.

I'm only asking, in a rhetorical way, to make other readers aware that 
your observations and statements can not be relied on.


Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14884

Op 10-Mar-12 21:23, Alf P. Steinbach schreef:
> On 10.03.2012 19:51, Dombo wrote:
>> Op 10-Mar-12 14:47, Mike McCarty schreef:
>>> On Friday, March 9, 2012 5:00:54 PM UTC-6, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>>> However, that ungood treatment of this archaic 7-bit format in one of
>>>> the few surviving newsreaders (Thunderbird) is just one example of how
>>>> quoted printable really really sucks.
>>>
>>> I've never used it but it sounds like Thunderbird is what really
>>> really sucks,
>>> being unable to reasonably display an "archaic" format like
>>> quoted-printable.
>>>
>>> Word-wrap is hardly a novel concept. I was using newsreaders in 1992
>>> that
>>> were capable of it (I know because people bitched about this problem
>>> then too).
>>
>> Christophers posting looks just fine on the version of Thunderbird I'm
>> using.
>
> Since you know that what you're saying is wrong (since you're using the
> exact same version of Thunderbird as I am), why are you posting this as
> an unqualified general assertion instead of posting it is as a question
> about what you're failing to check or failing to look at?

Considering you don't see what I'm seeing on my screen you are the one 
making unqualified assertions. Like I said before Christophers posting 
looks just fine on my screen. Since you are using the same version of 
Thunderbird it might be a settings issue.

Is it really that hard for you to respond in civil, polite way?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14891

On 11.03.2012 14:36, Dombo wrote:
> Op 10-Mar-12 21:23, Alf P. Steinbach schreef:
>> On 10.03.2012 19:51, Dombo wrote:
>>> Op 10-Mar-12 14:47, Mike McCarty schreef:
>>>> On Friday, March 9, 2012 5:00:54 PM UTC-6, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>>>> However, that ungood treatment of this archaic 7-bit format in one of
>>>>> the few surviving newsreaders (Thunderbird) is just one example of how
>>>>> quoted printable really really sucks.
>>>>
>>>> I've never used it but it sounds like Thunderbird is what really
>>>> really sucks,
>>>> being unable to reasonably display an "archaic" format like
>>>> quoted-printable.
>>>>
>>>> Word-wrap is hardly a novel concept. I was using newsreaders in 1992
>>>> that
>>>> were capable of it (I know because people bitched about this problem
>>>> then too).
>>>
>>> Christophers posting looks just fine on the version of Thunderbird I'm
>>> using.
>>
>> Since you know that what you're saying is wrong (since you're using the
>> exact same version of Thunderbird as I am), why are you posting this as
>> an unqualified general assertion instead of posting it is as a question
>> about what you're failing to check or failing to look at?
>
> Considering you don't see what I'm seeing on my screen you are the one
> making unqualified assertions. Like I said before Christophers posting
> looks just fine on my screen.

Why don't you ask about what you're failing to look at, or failing to 
check, since you know that your observations and/or understanding are 
wrong or incomplete, instead of making such unqualified general (and 
known to be wrong) assertions that your observations are correct?


> Since you are using the same version of
> Thunderbird it might be a settings issue.

Nope.


> Is it really that hard for you to respond in civil, polite way?

Why do you feel the need to attack my person?

Anyway, that marks you as a troll.


- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14897

Op 11-Mar-12 18:33, Alf P. Steinbach schreef:
> On 11.03.2012 14:36, Dombo wrote:
>> Op 10-Mar-12 21:23, Alf P. Steinbach schreef:
>>> On 10.03.2012 19:51, Dombo wrote:
>>>> Op 10-Mar-12 14:47, Mike McCarty schreef:
>>>>> On Friday, March 9, 2012 5:00:54 PM UTC-6, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>>>>> However, that ungood treatment of this archaic 7-bit format in one of
>>>>>> the few surviving newsreaders (Thunderbird) is just one example of
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> quoted printable really really sucks.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've never used it but it sounds like Thunderbird is what really
>>>>> really sucks,
>>>>> being unable to reasonably display an "archaic" format like
>>>>> quoted-printable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Word-wrap is hardly a novel concept. I was using newsreaders in 1992
>>>>> that
>>>>> were capable of it (I know because people bitched about this problem
>>>>> then too).
>>>>
>>>> Christophers posting looks just fine on the version of Thunderbird I'm
>>>> using.
>>>
>>> Since you know that what you're saying is wrong (since you're using the
>>> exact same version of Thunderbird as I am), why are you posting this as
>>> an unqualified general assertion instead of posting it is as a question
>>> about what you're failing to check or failing to look at?
>>
>> Considering you don't see what I'm seeing on my screen you are the one
>> making unqualified assertions. Like I said before Christophers posting
>> looks just fine on my screen.
>
> Why don't you ask about what you're failing to look at, or failing to
> check, since you know that your observations and/or understanding are
> wrong or incomplete, instead of making such unqualified general (and
> known to be wrong) assertions that your observations are correct?

My observation was, and is, that Christophers posting looked just fine 
in Thunderbird. That was intended as response to "I've never used it but 
it sounds like Thunderbird is what really really sucks" by Mike McCarty, 
it was not about you or to discredit you.

Only your response to Rui makes clear what the real problem is you are 
experiencing. That you failed to communicate that before is not my 
fault. You could have just replied with: "Yeah, it may look normal at 
first, but when you reply you get ridiculously long lines which takes a 
lot of editing to get it back to normal again.". That would have made 
your point much more clearly and would it leave a lot more reasonable 
impression about you, as opposed to the impression of some frustrated 
guy bitching about things for the sake of bitching.

>> Since you are using the same version of
>> Thunderbird it might be a settings issue.
>
> Nope.
>
>> Is it really that hard for you to respond in civil, polite way?
>
> Why do you feel the need to attack my person?

That describes exactly my impression about you after reading your 
replies here. It is you who implied that I was lying. The fact that you 
consider a mere observation how a piece of software displays a posting 
made by someone else to be a personal attack says a lot about you.

> Anyway, that marks you as a troll.

You have a funny definition of a troll. Your abrasive, provocative style 
of communicating seems to fit the definition of a troll better.

For your sake I hope you are just trolling a bit here and that your 
behaviour on usenet is not a reflection of your behaviour in real life. 
If it is a reflection how you are in real life I feel really sorry for you.

I hope you are not posting under your real name here (or a real name of 
someone else). Future employers might not get a very positive impression 
about you, and in particular your social skills, after a bit of Googling.

If you really think I'm troll, feel free to PLOINK me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14898

On 11.03.2012 20:41, Dombo wrote:
>
> You have a funny definition of a troll. Your abrasive, provocative style
> of communicating seems to fit the definition of a troll better.

It was more fun in the old days. Many of the trollers posted under their 
real names. And they didn't just spew out silly characterizations, they 
were intelligent in a way.

Anyway.

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14888

Alf P. Steinbach wrote:

>> Christophers posting looks just fine on the version of Thunderbird I'm
>> using.
> 
> Since you know that what you're saying is wrong (since you're using the
> exact same version of Thunderbird as I am), why are you posting this as
> an unqualified general assertion instead of posting it is as a question
> about what you're failing to check or failing to look at?

I've checked out Christopher's posts with both knode and thunderbird, and I 
have to say that they do look just fine on each client.

What issues did you experienced?


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14894

On 11.03.2012 18:18, Rui Maciel wrote:
> Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>
>>> Christophers posting looks just fine on the version of Thunderbird I'm
>>> using.
>>
>> Since you know that what you're saying is wrong (since you're using the
>> exact same version of Thunderbird as I am), why are you posting this as
>> an unqualified general assertion instead of posting it is as a question
>> about what you're failing to check or failing to look at?
>
> I've checked out Christopher's posts with both knode and thunderbird, and I
> have to say that they do look just fine on each client.
>
> What issues did you experienced?

When you reply to such a posting, all text in each "paragraph" becomes a 
single quoted line, which then needs manual formatting.

That is rather annoying.



Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14895

Alf P. Steinbach wrote:

> When you reply to such a posting, all text in each "paragraph" becomes a
> single quoted line, which then needs manual formatting.
> 
> That is rather annoying.

I see what you mean.  This also happens with knode, if it isn't configured 
to add quotes and line breaks to text lines which have more than 76 
characters.  

The thing is, it looks like thunderbird doesn't offer these options, and so 
it is unable to add quotes and line breaks to long, continuous lines.

Maybe a bug report is in order.


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14917

Am 11.03.12 18:39, schrieb Alf P. Steinbach:
> On 11.03.2012 18:18, Rui Maciel wrote:
>> What issues did you experienced?
>
> When you reply to such a posting, all text in each "paragraph" becomes a
> single quoted line, which then needs manual formatting.
>
> That is rather annoying.

I can see this sometimes with other posts, too, though I haven't noticed 
it is related to quoted printable encoding. However, in such a situation 
I just do Edit/Rewrap...[1] in Thunderbird, which nicely formats the 
posting in usenet compatible style.

	Christian

[1] No guarantee for the labels of the menu entry, since I'm using a 
German version of Thunderbird here. Besides, the input focus must 
already be in the body of the text, otherwise it is disabled

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14887

Mike McCarty wrote:

> I've never used it but it sounds like Thunderbird is what really really
> sucks, being unable to reasonably display an "archaic" format like
> quoted-printable.

As a thunderbird user, I have to say that, at least in some aspects, 
thunderbird does suck.  One of the main pet peeves I have with Thunderbird 
is how it is configured by default to force people to compose messages in 
HTML, instead of plain text.  I don't know if this is done by the people 
packaging Thunderbird for specific distros or by Mozilla folks, but it does 
suck. No user should be forced to rummage through the web to learn how to 
disable a behaviour that goes against well established bits of netiquette.

Yet, in spite of this, it is still the best email client out there.


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14874

Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> writes:
>"Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>> First, PLEASE DO NOT POST WITH QUOTED PRINTABLE FORMAT.
>>
>> It really really sucks.
>
>Why?
>
>Are there people out there still using newsreaders from 1987...?

Yes.  See headers.

scott

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++

csiph-web