Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? |
| Date | 2012-03-27 16:11 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <4F721F0B.2050701@verizon.net> (permalink) |
| References | <4f71cf85$0$21948$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <0.64ccc68ce1fe7a16cc7d.20120327172357BST.878vimnhb6.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <0.5a4e1aeae0758d15ba6c.20120327201205BST.87398too3e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <4F7215D1.3080208@verizon.net> <8c95547a-d482-4404-b6fc-b2e909d7e130@k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com> |
On 03/27/2012 03:47 PM, Harald van Dijk wrote: > On Mar 27, 9:32 pm, James Kuyper <jameskuy...@verizon.net> wrote: >> On 03/27/2012 03:12 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>> It's good to see that the change is just due to a change in terminology. >> >> Could you explain the change in terminology? I thought about the >> possibility that something like that was involved, but I didn't notice >> anything relevant. > > I didn't notice it either, but as Tim Rentsch pointed out, the change > is in 6.2.5p1. Ah - that explains why I didn't know what Ben was talking about. I've got Tim killfiled - not because he's a spammer or any other kind of idiot, but just because I found that I frequently ended up wasting lots of time in long discussions with him disagreeing about excessively subtle issues without either of us ever managing to change the mind of the other. That would not have mattered if the discussions had been fun, or at least interesting, but I just found them frustrating - which could just as easily have been my fault as his.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Francois Grieu <fgrieu@gmail.com> - 2012-03-27 16:32 +0200
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Harald van Dijk <haraldvdijk@gmail.com> - 2012-03-27 09:09 -0700
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-27 12:15 -0400
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Francois Grieu <fgrieu@gmail.com> - 2012-03-27 18:54 +0200
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-27 17:23 +0100
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-27 20:12 +0100
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-27 15:32 -0400
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Harald van Dijk <haraldvdijk@gmail.com> - 2012-03-27 12:47 -0700
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-27 16:11 -0400
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-27 10:32 -0700
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Francois Grieu <fgrieu@gmail.com> - 2012-03-28 15:08 +0200
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2012-03-28 09:07 +0200
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Francois Grieu <fgrieu@gmail.com> - 2012-03-28 16:15 +0200
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-03-28 14:26 +0000
Re: does 0<(unsigned short)0x8000 hold? Peter Nilsson <airia@acay.com.au> - 2012-03-27 23:22 -0700
csiph-web