Re: What a stupid gcc!

Path	csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.mixmin.net!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From	Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: What a stupid gcc!
Date	Tue, 19 Jun 2012 11:26:22 +1200
Lines	50
Message-ID	<a49rouF7l4U2@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<jrb1f1$18m$1@speranza.aioe.org> <c22c6f76-2090-447a-8aab-53384d65e1c3@googlegroups.com> <slrnjtr16f.rk7.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> <jrkckl$fh4$1@dont-email.me> <a49lc0F7l4U1@mid.individual.net> <jrod56$oum$1@reader1.panix.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
X-Trace	individual.net VDyUnFZ58il0prDUULLORQlmH5eQYxHOhX1+YHHsgcaJZapX4GL+o6PqMFFE38A9dL
Cancel-Lock	sha1:1MkERyy2+JNYq5r21L+d4fHEYkY=
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; SunOS i86pc; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120423 Thunderbird/12.0
In-Reply-To	<jrod56$oum$1@reader1.panix.com>
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.c:22381

Show key headers only | View raw

On 06/19/12 11:21 AM, Paul J Gans wrote:
> Ian Collins<ian-news@hotmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 06/17/12 10:47 PM, BartC wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jorgen Grahn"<grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>   wrote in message
>>> news:slrnjtr16f.rk7.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid...
>>>> On Thu, 2012-06-14, Varun Tewari wrote:
>>>>> Its simply not stupid, its a simple fact the C++/Java allow
>>>>> decalaration anywhere in the code, but C wants them the first thing
>>>>> when you code. That's all
>>>>
>>>> You could say that "declarations only at the start of block" was a
>>>> stupid design ... I'm very happy this got changed, and it should
>>>> probably have happened earlier, when 'const' and such things were
>>>> introduced.
>>>>
>>>> Now all that remains is to educate the users.  Most code I read
>>>> doesn't even use the C89 "at the start of block" rule. It lumps all
>>>> the variables at the start of the function -- even those that are only
>>>> used and only make sense inside some loop, two pages down ...
>>>
>>> But what happens when the code defines a variable two pages into a function,
>>> but you happen to be reading some code using that same variable four pages
>>> into the function!
>
>> Then you (or the original authour) are doing something very very wrong.
>
>>> Where do you go to find the definition? At the start of a
>>> function is usually a good place! You don't always know that a variable is
>>> only used once.
>
>> C is the only language I know that had (in the last century) such
>> restrictive declaration rules.  You wouldn't see this argument on a
>> forum for another language.  If old C's declaration rules were such a
>> good idea, why have thy been ignored by most (all?) subsequent languages?
>
> I'd think the argument works the other way.  Back when C was
> new the other dominant language was FORTRAN.  Later came both
> Basic, Algol, and Cobol.  All were strongly typed languages.
>
> Of these only C survives to any major extent, proving, it seems
> to me, that it was the most *successful* of these languages.
> Indeed, it also shows that perhaps in spite of its strong typing,
> it has held up under the barrage of "new" languages.

What has strong typing do do with where a variable is declared?

-- 
Ian Collins

Thread

What a stupid gcc! zgene <nospam@nospam.com> - 2012-06-13 21:41 +0000
  Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-13 18:01 -0400
    Re: What a stupid gcc! Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2012-06-14 13:00 +0200
      Re: What a stupid gcc! Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-06-14 14:33 +0200
        Re: What a stupid gcc! Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-06-14 14:46 +0100
        Re: What a stupid gcc! Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2012-06-14 18:19 +0200
  Re: What a stupid gcc! Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-13 18:06 -0400
  Re: What a stupid gcc! jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2012-06-13 22:19 +0000
    Re: What a stupid gcc! Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-06-14 09:47 +0100
      Re: What a stupid gcc! Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-06-14 14:37 +0100
  Re: What a stupid gcc! Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2012-06-13 17:05 -0600
  Re: What a stupid gcc! Nick Bowler <nbowler@draconx.ca> - 2012-06-14 00:09 +0000
  Re: What a stupid gcc! Varun Tewari <tewari.varun@gmail.com> - 2012-06-14 03:14 -0700
    Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-14 06:56 -0400
    Re: What a stupid gcc! Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-06-17 07:18 +0000
      Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-17 11:47 +0100
        Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-17 09:31 -0400
          Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-18 12:34 +0100
            Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-18 08:18 -0400
              Re: What a stupid gcc! gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 05:42 -0700
                Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-18 09:39 -0400
              Re: What a stupid gcc! Rich Webb <bbew.ar@mapson.nozirev.ten> - 2012-06-18 09:06 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 07:18 -0700
            Re: What a stupid gcc! nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-06-19 00:13 -0700
              Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-19 11:28 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-19 07:30 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-06-20 00:16 -0700
        Re: What a stupid gcc! Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-06-17 15:52 +0100
        Re: What a stupid gcc! Noob <root@localhost> - 2012-06-18 09:07 +0200
        Re: What a stupid gcc! Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-06-18 09:03 +0000
        Re: What a stupid gcc! Andrew Smallshaw <andrews@sdf.lonestar.org> - 2012-06-18 16:02 +0000
          Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-18 19:40 +0100
            Re: What a stupid gcc! Noob <root@localhost> - 2012-06-18 23:52 +0200
            Re: What a stupid gcc! Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2012-06-18 23:09 +0000
              Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-19 01:30 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 13:03 +1200
                Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-19 06:34 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ike Naar <ike@sverige.freeshell.org> - 2012-06-19 08:43 +0000
                Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-19 11:00 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-19 07:05 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 23:21 +1200
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 23:22 +1200
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-06-19 13:45 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-19 15:23 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2012-06-19 16:14 +0000
                Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-19 18:01 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-19 13:59 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2012-06-19 15:29 -0600
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-06-19 18:22 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-19 21:13 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Lew Pitcher <lpitcher@teksavvy.com> - 2012-06-19 16:27 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-19 16:38 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-06-20 09:47 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-06-19 22:44 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-06-21 01:39 -0700
                Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-21 10:55 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-06-21 04:11 -0700
                Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-21 12:36 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-06-21 15:33 +0200
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Andrew Smallshaw <andrews@sdf.lonestar.org> - 2012-06-21 14:15 +0000
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-06-20 09:37 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-20 14:54 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-06-20 18:19 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-21 00:13 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-06-21 02:09 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-06-21 02:05 -0700
                Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-21 11:49 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-06-21 14:24 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-06-22 00:38 -0700
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-06-22 13:37 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-06-21 01:57 -0700
                Re: What a stupid gcc! "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-21 11:46 +0100
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-06-21 14:37 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Andrew Smallshaw <andrews@sdf.lonestar.org> - 2012-06-21 19:38 +0000
                Re: What a stupid gcc! nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-06-21 01:41 -0700
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-06-21 12:28 +0100
              Re: What a stupid gcc! Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-06-19 15:05 +0000
        Re: What a stupid gcc! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 09:37 +1200
          Re: What a stupid gcc! ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 15:18 -0700
          Re: What a stupid gcc! Paul J Gans <gansno@panix.com> - 2012-06-18 23:21 +0000
            Re: What a stupid gcc! Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-19 11:26 +1200
              Re: What a stupid gcc! Paul J Gans <gansno@panix.com> - 2012-06-19 01:46 +0000
                Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-19 07:19 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-06-19 08:01 -0500
                Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-19 09:25 -0400
                Re: What a stupid gcc! Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-06-19 12:57 -0500
                Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-19 14:59 -0400
            Re: What a stupid gcc! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-06-19 01:36 +0100
              Re: What a stupid gcc! Paul J Gans <gansno@panix.com> - 2012-06-19 01:48 +0000
          Re: What a stupid gcc! Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-06-18 19:50 -0500
          Re: What a stupid gcc! nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-06-19 00:19 -0700
            Re: What a stupid gcc! Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-06-19 12:56 +0100
              Re: What a stupid gcc! nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-06-20 00:26 -0700
                Re: What a stupid gcc! James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-20 06:31 -0400
      Re: What a stupid gcc! Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2012-06-18 00:18 -0600
        Re: What a stupid gcc! Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-06-18 09:15 +0000
  Re: What a stupid gcc! Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-06-14 23:21 +0000

csiph-web