Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: C String terminator Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 07:35:08 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 27 Message-ID: <864ktsn2w3.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <87v9p9bylk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <861rrtj9hx.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87d0bc8xf6.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <861rquhlqk.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87wo8m9nm4.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86imjyd2hl.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87blpqa6y6.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <867dz589t3.fsf@linuxsc.com> <875zepvvu1.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86sghl6eop.fsf@linuxsc.com> <61f8fb26-45fb-46c4-8bf4-d85d8fb94a8d@googlegroups.com> <86a73tpb20.fsf@linuxsc.com> <2a770f28-0124-4b7e-8da3-24c05dd75636@googlegroups.com> <86y2ramwr7.fsf@linuxsc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="bedbb4a28902cd1137b240ce253aab81"; logging-data="32415"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+3WmY/Ms60R4Ss3MqeBrllN69PfgILluw=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:tWwfpqdAYybRGSL2t8hbIBf0dEA= sha1:4uADONEwSfk+s3Y6ypWXBWmojGQ= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:151260 Malcolm McLean writes: > On Sunday, 5 April 2020 04:34:25 UTC+1, Tim Rentsch wrote: > >> Malcolm has wacky ideas. Surely he must know by now that other >> people think his ideas are wacky -- my comment is nowhere near the >> first to suggest wackiness in one way or another. Furthermore it >> doesn't seem to bother or offend him that people express such >> reactions. It was not my intention to insult Malcolm. I expected >> he wouldn't react much one way or the other no matter what I said. >> What I wrote was written mainly out of a sense of frustration: >> frustration at not being able to have any really productive dialog >> with Malcolm, despite years of trying. >> >> As for some (not all) other folks who joined the conversation after >> the fact, I find their behavior extremely much more offensive than >> my comment to Malcolm, even if had been meant to be insulting. > > I interpreted it as you being annoyed because others were sniping > at you. To be fair, my original post wasn't very well considered. > > I'm sorry you feel you can't have a productive discussion with me, > but I really don't know what to do about that. You're not obliged > to engage, of course. If you agree not to reply to my postings I agree not to reply to yours. Okay?