Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #11845 > unrolled thread
| Started by | scs@eskimo.com (Steve Summit) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-10-18 00:00 +0000 |
| Last post | 2011-10-27 00:18 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 291 — 52 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation scs@eskimo.com (Steve Summit) - 2011-10-18 00:00 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-10-18 05:20 -0600
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2011-11-11 23:51 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Dann Corbit <dcorbit@connx.com> - 2011-10-18 14:37 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-19 10:52 +1300
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "James" <no@spam.invalid> - 2011-10-18 16:47 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-19 00:02 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "Bill Davy" <Bill@SynectixLtd.com> - 2011-10-19 08:57 +0100
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-19 02:13 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Kleuskes & Moos <kleuske@somewhere.else.net> - 2011-10-19 13:41 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-20 00:04 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-10-19 15:32 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-10-19 09:57 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Frederick Williams <freddywilliams@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-19 20:46 +0100
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation 88888 dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-19 13:06 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-10-19 20:49 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2011-10-19 19:04 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation lovecreatesbeauty <lovecreatesbeauty@gmail.com> - 2011-10-20 07:43 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Frederick Williams <freddywilliams@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-21 16:56 +0100
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "sadsailor" <overboard@the.oceans> - 2011-10-21 16:37 -0500
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-10-21 17:17 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2011-10-21 13:30 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-22 07:57 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation bks@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) - 2011-10-22 15:51 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-10-22 18:19 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-23 08:00 +1300
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Frederick Williams <freddywilliams@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-23 15:39 +0100
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-23 05:55 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-10-23 21:30 +0100
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2011-10-23 14:27 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-10-23 10:28 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-23 08:36 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "Charles Richmond" <netnews@aquaporin4.com> - 2011-10-23 23:21 -0500
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "Charles Richmond" <netnews@aquaporin4.com> - 2011-10-23 23:21 -0500
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "Charles Richmond" <netnews@aquaporin4.com> - 2011-10-23 23:23 -0500
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-10-23 12:35 -0500
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-10-23 14:01 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-10-23 14:34 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-10-23 13:49 -0600
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-10-23 18:14 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-24 01:59 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-10-24 06:25 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-10-24 14:43 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-24 09:01 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation André Gillibert <MetaEntropy.removeThis@gmail.com> - 2011-10-24 18:23 +0200
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-25 08:02 +1300
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-25 00:44 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-10-25 21:24 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-26 00:58 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-26 23:21 +1300
OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-10-29 06:56 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C Markus Wichmann <nullplan@gmx.net> - 2011-10-29 21:18 +0200
Re: OOP and C++ and C nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-30 10:43 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-31 02:26 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 08:43 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-01 03:11 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 08:17 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 06:16 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2011-11-28 00:23 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-27 23:57 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-28 00:20 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2011-11-29 23:36 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-30 12:42 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-11-30 10:46 +0100
Re: OOP and C++ and C jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2011-12-01 23:20 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-02 12:39 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-12-02 00:42 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-02 13:45 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-12-02 00:57 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-12-02 08:49 +0100
Re: OOP and C++ and C jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2011-12-02 17:45 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-11-30 21:42 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-11-30 22:59 +0100
Re: OOP and C++ and C Quentin Pope <qp19433@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> - 2011-11-30 22:09 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-01 11:20 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-12-01 00:21 +0100
Re: OOP and C++ and C Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-01 01:22 -0800
Re: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and programming JohnF <john@please.see.sig.for.email.com> - 2011-12-01 10:18 +0000
Re: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and programming Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-01 04:57 -0800
Re: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and programming JohnF <john@please.see.sig.for.email.com> - 2011-12-02 08:34 +0000
Re: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and programming Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-12-01 13:38 +0000
Re: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and programming 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2011-12-01 13:47 -0800
Re: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and programming JohnF <john@please.see.sig.for.email.com> - 2011-12-02 08:10 +0000
Re: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and programming Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-12-02 17:48 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-30 18:35 -0500
Re: OOP and C++ and C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-12-01 02:53 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-12-01 07:07 -0500
Re: OOP and C++ and C Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-12-04 00:35 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2011-12-03 18:28 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2011-11-30 14:10 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-12-01 00:15 +0100
Re: OOP and C++ and C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-01 12:21 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-12-01 00:29 +0100
Operator overloading extensions (Was re: OOP and C++ and C) "Joel C. Salomon" <joelcsalomon@gmail.com> - 2011-12-01 15:50 -0500
Re: OOP and C++ and C "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-12-01 07:38 +0100
Re: OOP and C++ and C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-01 20:26 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-30 18:37 -0500
Re: OOP and C++ and C Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-01 02:05 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-12-01 07:09 -0500
Re: OOP and C++ and C Markus Wichmann <nullplan@gmx.net> - 2011-11-01 10:13 +0100
Re: OOP and C++ and C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-01 23:02 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-01 04:04 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 08:45 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-01 09:25 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 09:30 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-01 12:59 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 10:30 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-01 14:33 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 13:10 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-01 16:37 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 13:44 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-01 21:03 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-01 16:26 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-03 02:38 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 22:53 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-03 16:03 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-30 01:07 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-30 21:22 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-30 04:41 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-10-30 08:40 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-30 10:56 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-31 03:03 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-31 02:59 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-30 07:56 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-30 08:13 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-10-30 18:05 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-30 11:38 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-31 07:56 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-31 01:11 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-31 21:34 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 08:36 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-01 07:37 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-10-31 06:55 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-31 06:08 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-10-31 10:42 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-31 07:56 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-10-31 12:54 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-01 07:47 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-10-30 19:46 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-31 01:49 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-10-31 15:15 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 09:01 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-10-31 18:04 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 11:56 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-01 03:03 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-31 09:18 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 09:39 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-31 09:54 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 10:11 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-01 03:22 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-31 23:08 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 09:04 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-31 09:26 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 09:37 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-31 10:01 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-01 07:59 +1300
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 09:52 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 17:25 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-11-01 21:44 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 07:07 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-30 08:33 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-10-30 18:00 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-31 03:20 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-10-31 20:07 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 13:48 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-10-31 22:18 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-01 03:59 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 22:52 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-01 04:27 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-01 18:56 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 12:59 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-01 16:46 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 14:16 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-01 21:35 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 08:22 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-02 10:14 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 12:09 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) jameskuyper <jameskuyper@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 13:11 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 15:01 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-02 22:11 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 15:32 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-02 21:31 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-03 07:41 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 19:58 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) pacman@kosh.dhis.org (Alan Curry) - 2011-11-02 21:45 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-02 14:26 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-02 11:07 -0400
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-03 12:51 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-03 06:36 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-03 14:34 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-03 08:41 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-04 03:30 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-04 09:03 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-04 09:24 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-04 09:44 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-09 00:06 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-09 00:03 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-09 10:57 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-10 09:13 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-10 11:05 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-10 13:23 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-10 14:47 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-11-11 00:17 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-11 09:29 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-11 18:05 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-11-11 18:19 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-11 13:28 -0500
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-11-11 18:37 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-11 14:13 -0500
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-11 11:17 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-11 21:49 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-11-11 22:11 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-11 14:19 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-12 02:50 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-12 01:44 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-12 17:54 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-12 11:38 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-14 02:36 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-14 16:01 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-14 10:40 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-11-14 18:36 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-14 11:51 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-14 12:08 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-11-14 20:25 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-14 13:11 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-11-14 21:46 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-14 14:56 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-11-14 23:01 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-14 15:50 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-11-15 02:48 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-15 08:52 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-11-14 20:15 -0500
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-11-15 02:48 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-14 14:17 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-11-14 22:38 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2011-11-14 14:45 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-14 15:21 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-11-14 23:40 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-14 15:59 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-11-14 12:16 -0600
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-11-14 18:25 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-11 14:15 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-11 23:53 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-11 16:16 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-11 19:53 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-11 12:02 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-14 02:05 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-14 08:36 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-10 17:00 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-11 04:53 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-11 09:27 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-12 04:27 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-10 23:00 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-10 15:10 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-11 03:30 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-11 00:41 -0800
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-11-12 05:14 +0000
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2011-11-21 02:39 -0500
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-10-30 11:00 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-10-30 19:09 +0100
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-30 11:51 -0700
Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-10-30 20:36 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-10-24 12:16 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-10-25 20:30 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-10-24 15:52 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-10-24 21:40 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201110.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-10-26 06:13 +0200
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-26 01:34 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-10-26 09:47 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201110.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-10-27 04:54 +0200
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-10-27 11:27 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation AK <anoopkammaran@gmail.com> - 2011-10-20 00:01 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation lovecreatesbeauty <lovecreatesbeauty@gmail.com> - 2011-10-20 07:50 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2011-10-20 11:07 -0400
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-10-20 16:31 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-10-20 11:13 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-20 11:43 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-10-21 08:35 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-21 02:45 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation André Gillibert <MetaEntropy.removeThis@gmail.com> - 2011-10-24 18:41 +0200
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-10-25 14:06 +0000
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-25 10:13 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "Charles Richmond" <netnews@aquaporin4.com> - 2011-10-20 21:58 -0500
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "Charles Richmond" <netnews@aquaporin4.com> - 2011-10-20 21:52 -0500
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-10-23 10:32 +0200
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-23 05:58 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation lovecreatesbeauty <lovecreatesbeauty@gmail.com> - 2011-10-20 07:40 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-25 10:19 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-26 01:53 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-26 14:40 -0700
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-27 00:18 -0700
Page 14 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 Next page →
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-30 11:51 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) |
| Message-ID | <e56d0395-a3ca-4e36-9226-8607057c2e75@a12g2000vbz.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #12300 |
On Oct 30, 8:09 pm, "io_x" <a...@b.c.invalid> wrote: > > std::vector<int> v1(10); > std::vector<int> v2(10); > v1[0] = 27; > v1[1] = v1[2]; > memcpy (&v2[0], &v1[0], 10); > > > I don't see the problem. > This is classic badly-written C++. As always, the issue is hard to illustrate in a snippet or toy example, but bites you in real code. std::vector<int> grocery_ids(10); /* deep down in the gubbins */ memcpy(grocery_ids, toptensellers, 10 * sizeof(int)); Ten years later, the business expands. We have been giving each line of groceries an id, but now we've reached the 2 billion mark. the first line becomes std::vector<BIGNUM> grocery_ids(10); Now most of the code has been written using iterators, and is robust to this. But your little routine, hidden away deep in the gubbins, is now a bug. -- Lots of C programming resources http://www.malcolmmclean.site11.com/www
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-30 20:36 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: OOP and C++ and C (was Re: Dennis Ritchie -- An Appreciation) |
| Message-ID | <0.f0ceaae8d6c70a0c8374.20111030203645GMT.87wrbmdxnm.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #12306 |
Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> writes: > On Oct 30, 8:09 pm, "io_x" <a...@b.c.invalid> wrote: >> >> std::vector<int> v1(10); >> std::vector<int> v2(10); >> v1[0] = 27; >> v1[1] = v1[2]; >> memcpy (&v2[0], &v1[0], 10); >> >> >> I don't see the problem. >> > This is classic badly-written C++. As always, the issue is hard to > illustrate in a snippet or toy example, but bites you in real code. > > std::vector<int> grocery_ids(10); > > /* deep down in the gubbins */ > memcpy(grocery_ids, toptensellers, 10 * sizeof(int)); I agree it's bad C++ but it's bad C as well. You need memcpy(grocery_ids, toptensellers, 10 * sizeof grocery_ids[0]); to avoid the most obvious problems down the line. If the two arrays end up having different element types, the bug is much more serious than just this memcpy. Here again, C++ offers a simple solution (use the "counted" form of std::copy) where C does not. > Ten years later, the business expands. We have been giving each line > of groceries an id, but now we've reached the 2 billion mark. > > the first line becomes > > std::vector<BIGNUM> grocery_ids(10); > > Now most of the code has been written using iterators, and is robust > to this. But your little routine, hidden away deep in the gubbins, is > now a bug. I'm still struggling to see where C++ adds problems rather than offering solutions. -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-24 12:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j8430f$qc5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #12033 |
On 10/24/11 10:43 AM, Jorgen Grahn wrote: > On Mon, 2011-10-24, Malcolm McLean wrote: >> On Oct 24, 12:14 am, James Kuyper<jameskuy...@verizon.net> wrote: >>> >>>> In one day they aren't using much of STL, name spaces (except adding a >>>> using namespace std:) or other advance features. >>> >>> A statement that "I've learned C++" would not be justified by that level >>> of understanding.. >>> >> There weren't any templates or namespaces, and exception handling was >> widely non-implemented. >> >> Basically you were using C++ once you had an object hierarchy, > > The kind of perverted C++ I hate the most is C code squeezed into an > unnatural inheritance hierarchy. I wasn't around in the early days, > but I get the impression that virtual inheritance was the C++ feature > stuck in the minds of many C programmers switching. > > I find run-time polymorphism one of the less useful features of C++. I > design a lot of classes, but there are very few "is-a" relationships > between them. > > /Jorgen > I probably depends a lot on the type of programs you write, I find I use it a lot. It also is fundamental to some parts of C++, for example iostreams (the generic use of streams for insertion and the separation of streams and buffers as implemented very much depends on polymorphism). Also exceptions would be a lot less friendly without polymorphism. I do agree that using inheritance just because you might get some code sharing can lead to very bad code, and I've seen my share of "forced" class hierarchy, but there are a lot of good uses for run-time polymorphism.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-25 20:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnjae72f.1bk.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> |
| In reply to | #12040 |
On Mon, 2011-10-24, Richard Damon wrote: > On 10/24/11 10:43 AM, Jorgen Grahn wrote: >> On Mon, 2011-10-24, Malcolm McLean wrote: >>> On Oct 24, 12:14 am, James Kuyper<jameskuy...@verizon.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In one day they aren't using much of STL, name spaces (except adding a >>>>> using namespace std:) or other advance features. >>>> >>>> A statement that "I've learned C++" would not be justified by that level >>>> of understanding.. >>>> >>> There weren't any templates or namespaces, and exception handling was >>> widely non-implemented. >>> >>> Basically you were using C++ once you had an object hierarchy, >> >> The kind of perverted C++ I hate the most is C code squeezed into an >> unnatural inheritance hierarchy. I wasn't around in the early days, >> but I get the impression that virtual inheritance was the C++ feature >> stuck in the minds of many C programmers switching. >> >> I find run-time polymorphism one of the less useful features of C++. I >> design a lot of classes, but there are very few "is-a" relationships >> between them. > I probably depends a lot on the type of programs you write, I find I use > it a lot. Yes -- I was about to add such a reservation to my posting. I think my programming is quite varied, but I do no GUI programming for example. > It also is fundamental to some parts of C++, for example > iostreams (the generic use of streams for insertion and the separation > of streams and buffers as implemented very much depends on > polymorphism). It's great that you can treat strings as files, but apart from that the polymorphism is pretty much under the hood. > Also exceptions would be a lot less friendly without > polymorphism. Yes, that's another -- they more or less need it. > I do agree that using inheritance just because you might get some code > sharing can lead to very bad code, and I've seen my share of "forced" > class hierarchy, but there are a lot of good uses for run-time > polymorphism. There *are* good uses, and it's a feature that belongs in C++, but it's IMHO overused. /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-24 15:52 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4ea5c1fc$0$13444$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net> |
| In reply to | #11875 |
Dann Corbit wrote:
> C is close enough to the hardware to allow me to avoid writing
> assembly in order to keep a program fast. Yet C is abstract enough
> to write complicated ideas in a symbolic way in order to make the
> code easy to maintain.
>
> C is the mother of the modern OO languages like C++ and Java.
>
> My first programming language was Fortran IV. My second programming
> language was PL/1. But C (while the 3rd programming language that I
> learned) was the first programming language that I loved.
>
> And I am really, really hard to please.
>
> There are some programming giants. Donald Knuth, W. Richard Stevens,
> and Dennis Ritchie top my list. How about yours?
Charles Babbage and Ada Lovelace.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-24 21:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4ea613a4$0$19273$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net> |
| In reply to | #12051 |
Bill Cunningham wrote: > Dann Corbit wrote: >> C is close enough to the hardware to allow me to avoid writing >> assembly in order to keep a program fast. Yet C is abstract enough >> to write complicated ideas in a symbolic way in order to make the >> code easy to maintain. >> >> C is the mother of the modern OO languages like C++ and Java. >> >> My first programming language was Fortran IV. My second programming >> language was PL/1. But C (while the 3rd programming language that I >> learned) was the first programming language that I loved. >> >> And I am really, really hard to please. >> >> There are some programming giants. Donald Knuth, W. Richard Stevens, >> and Dennis Ritchie top my list. How about yours? > > Charles Babbage and Ada Lovelace. And don't forget Jim Gosling.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201110.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-26 06:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <374054339142228a9556716824677f6c@msgid.frell.theremailer.net> |
| In reply to | #12066 |
> >> C is the mother of the modern OO languages like C++ and Java. Oh it's a mother alright, but the OO comes from Simula and elsewhere. Go read some Bjarne and find out the truth. > >> My first programming language was Fortran IV. My second programming > >> language was PL/1. But C (while the 3rd programming language that I > >> learned) was the first programming language that I loved. You're one sick puppy. PL/I (not 1, ya big MORON!) stomps C flat. > >> And I am really, really hard to please. Not that you're hard to please, you're just dopey. > And don't forget Jim Gosling. Yeah, the guy who wrote Emacs! Hey Stallman, eat shit!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-26 01:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fa4120f6-14fd-44fb-b687-1bbb14a32d75@p16g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #12108 |
On Oct 26, 5:13 am, Fritz Wuehler <fr...@spamexpire- > PL/I [...] stomps C flat. which is why magazines used to feature articals that started "So, what does this [apparently innocuous] line of PL/I actually do? You might be surprised at the answer!" Its tendency to allow almost anything to be assiged to anything else led to quite astonishing results. "PL/I: the best of both FORTRAN *and* COBOL"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-26 09:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4ea80f7a$0$16274$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net> |
| In reply to | #12108 |
Fritz Wuehler wrote:
>>>> C is the mother of the modern OO languages like C++ and Java.
>
> Oh it's a mother alright, but the OO comes from Simula and elsewhere.
> Go read some Bjarne and find out the truth.
>
>>>> My first programming language was Fortran IV. My second
>>>> programming language was PL/1. But C (while the 3rd programming
>>>> language that I learned) was the first programming language that I
>>>> loved.
>
> You're one sick puppy. PL/I (not 1, ya big MORON!) stomps C flat.
>
>>>> And I am really, really hard to please.
>
> Not that you're hard to please, you're just dopey.
>
>> And don't forget Jim Gosling.
>
> Yeah, the guy who wrote Emacs! Hey Stallman, eat shit!
True but I kinda meant Java.
Bill
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201110.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-27 04:54 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <f088beab1a42cd4a6d6e5033ac78bc9b@msgid.frell.theremailer.net> |
| In reply to | #12120 |
"Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> wrote: > >> And don't forget Jim Gosling. > > > > Yeah, the guy who wrote Emacs! Hey Stallman, eat shit! > > True but I kinda meant Java. Yeah but Java borrowed/stole heavily from other stuff also, notably Modula-3 and the same foundations C++ was based on (Simula for example). I don't think Java was Gosling's biggest achievement although it certainly made him the most fame and fortune. Before Java he did do some real invention.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-27 11:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fb9a6b94-042d-4291-b7ea-efc36203bf30@r2g2000vbj.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #12137 |
On Oct 26, 9:54 pm, Fritz Wuehler <fr...@spamexpire-201110.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote: > "Bill Cunningham" <nos...@nspam.invalid> wrote: > > >> And don't forget Jim Gosling. > > > > Yeah, the guy who wrote Emacs! Hey Stallman, eat shit! > > > True but I kinda meant Java. > > Yeah but Java borrowed/stole heavily from other stuff also, notably > Modula-3 and the same foundations C++ was based on (Simula for example). I > don't think Java was Gosling's biggest achievement although it certainly > made him the most fame and fortune. Before Java he did do some real > invention. Is that a veiled reference to NeWS? The greatest Window System before or since!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | AK <anoopkammaran@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-20 00:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7c1f9b35-10b6-4902-8f1d-3e0102067ad5@g25g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #11845 |
On Oct 17, 5:00 pm, s...@eskimo.com (Steve Summit) wrote: > [I haven't posted here in quite some time, but I should > definitely post this here. It's also on the web athttp://www.eskimo.com/~scs/dmr.html.] > > I'm a programmer, and just about always have been. > My favorite programming language is still C, and my favorite > operating system is still Unix. Dennis Ritchie was, of course, > jointly responsible for both. So I have definitely lost a > personal hero and, to the extent that I can claim I've learned > from his work, a mentor as well. Same here. In fact, I'm quite pissed at the press in my country, who gave a front page tribute to Steve Jobs and not even a mention about Dennis Ritchie. > It's been said that Unix killed research in operating systems. > I find I don't mind, because Unix is just about perfect. > It's said that you have to keep updating your skills in the tech > world, but I've been programming professionally in C and Unix for > more than 30 years now, and I don't expect to have to switch anytime > soon. In a field that does tend to burn down and reincarnate > itself at least once every five years or so, those two wonderful > little programming systems have proved remarkably durable. > (And they *are* little, which is one of their underappreciated charms.) > > Just about everybody of a certain era in programming probably > considers Dennis a hero. The tech world being a bit more > gregarious and less stratified than (say) Hollywood, Dennis was > delightfully approachable. It was always a thrill to see a post > from dmr in a Usenet newsgroup, the more so if it was in response > to one of your own posts, the more so if he agreed with you. > And if you got an email out of the blue -- well, that was > *really* one to be treasured. But you didn't have to wait; any > random hacker out there on the net could send an email to dmr, > and he'd often reply. (I know this because he once thanked me -- > another email to treasure! -- for being able to save time by > simply pointing supplicants to the comp.lang.c FAQ list I'd > compiled.) > > Random reminiscence: it's a USENIX conference, sometime in the > mid-90's. There's a session on copyright and other intellectual > property issues, and as always happens when computer types > discuss this topic, there are a bunch of flamboyant statements > being made about how copyrights and patents on software are > Evil, information wants to be free, etc., etc. One commentator, > objecting to the possibility that too-strict copyrights might > stifle progress, solemnly opines that he doesn't want to be > stuck using 20 year old software. But sitting right in front > of me happens to be Dennis Ritchie, who calls out in a rather > commanding voice, "But you all do!" > > I'd like to say I'll miss him not only as a mentor but as a > personal friend, but I only met him once or twice, so I can't > honestly say that. But I can say this: every time I simply type > > r = read(fd, buf, 13); > > to read 13 bytes from a file without worrying about its record > structure, Dennis Ritchie lives. Every time I pipe something to > grep rather than having to eyeball it for a pattern I'm looking > for, Dennis Ritchie lives. Most importantly, every time I have > the pleasure of writing (or using!) a software tool that's > wondrously small and simple, that does one job and does it well, > Dennis Ritchie lives. > > In fact, that's not a bad epitaph. Dennis Ritchie: he did one > job, and he did it well. Amen...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lovecreatesbeauty <lovecreatesbeauty@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-20 07:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5d01092b-ef36-4491-9970-8df0ae813cd6@k13g2000prg.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #11899 |
On Oct 20, 3:01 pm, AK <anoopkamma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Same here. In fact, I'm quite pissed at the press in my country, who > gave a front page tribute to Steve Jobs and not even a mention about > Dennis Ritchie. > I read it on Google News and New York Times reported it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-20 11:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4EA03941.746BB773@bytecraft.com> |
| In reply to | #11899 |
AK wrote: > On Oct 17, 5:00 pm, s...@eskimo.com (Steve Summit) wrote: > > [I haven't posted here in quite some time, but I should > > definitely post this here. It's also on the web athttp://www.eskimo.com/~scs/dmr.html.] > > > > I'm a programmer, and just about always have been. > > My favorite programming language is still C, and my favorite > > operating system is still Unix. Dennis Ritchie was, of course, > > jointly responsible for both. So I have definitely lost a > > personal hero and, to the extent that I can claim I've learned > > from his work, a mentor as well. > > Same here. In fact, I'm quite pissed at the press in my country, who > gave a front page tribute to Steve Jobs and not even a mention about > Dennis Ritchie. Dennis Ritchie is on a short list of individuals who had a huge impact on computing as we know it. The press unfortunately finds it difficult to explain how the tools we use are essential for the applications we write. Steve Jobs set a standard for computing from a user perspective. w..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-20 16:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20111020120423.351@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #11912 |
On 2011-10-20, Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote: > > > AK wrote: > >> On Oct 17, 5:00 pm, s...@eskimo.com (Steve Summit) wrote: >> > [I haven't posted here in quite some time, but I should >> > definitely post this here. It's also on the web athttp://www.eskimo.com/~scs/dmr.html.] >> > >> > I'm a programmer, and just about always have been. >> > My favorite programming language is still C, and my favorite >> > operating system is still Unix. Dennis Ritchie was, of course, >> > jointly responsible for both. So I have definitely lost a >> > personal hero and, to the extent that I can claim I've learned >> > from his work, a mentor as well. >> >> Same here. In fact, I'm quite pissed at the press in my country, who >> gave a front page tribute to Steve Jobs and not even a mention about >> Dennis Ritchie. Why would they start mentioning Ritchie when he died, if they didn't mention him while he was alive? Steve Jobs made news while he was alive, so of course (that's why) he made news when he died. When an athlete makes a new world in the 100m hurdles, we do not honor the inventor of the hurdle. Whatever people achieve in C is /in spite/ of the language.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-20 11:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9948140b-2622-4e4a-a763-9b46487dc2f1@a25g2000yqi.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #11915 |
On Oct 20, 6:31 pm, Kaz Kylheku <k...@kylheku.com> wrote: > > Whatever people achieve in C is /in spite/ of the language. > Oh rubbish. There are many, many computer languages out there. University computer scientists are almost obliged to release a new one as a career development point. C was the one which stuck, and gave birth to C++ and Java, the other two popular languages. -- MiniBasic - how to write a script interpreter (my career development point) http://www.malcolmmclean.site11.com/www
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-20 11:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <16731825.980.1319136232011.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prng5> |
| In reply to | #11918 |
I recommend Bill gates for gwbasic and Guido for python!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-21 08:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnja2bnd.1bk.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> |
| In reply to | #11918 |
On Thu, 2011-10-20, Malcolm McLean wrote: > On Oct 20, 6:31 pm, Kaz Kylheku <k...@kylheku.com> wrote: >> >> Whatever people achieve in C is /in spite/ of the language. >> > Oh rubbish. I was going to write a much longer response, but your first sentence sums it up, really. /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-21 02:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5c406110-0448-4a39-a616-44df3b742630@g25g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #11933 |
On Oct 21, 9:35 am, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+n...@snipabacken.se> wrote: > On Thu, 2011-10-20, Malcolm McLean wrote: > > On Oct 20, 6:31 pm, Kaz Kylheku <k...@kylheku.com> wrote: > > >> Whatever people achieve in C is /in spite/ of the language. > > > Oh rubbish. > > I was going to write a much longer response, but your first sentence > sums it up, really. quite. "Why Pascal Isn't My Favoutite Language" (or something like that) is worth a read
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | André Gillibert <MetaEntropy.removeThis@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-24 18:41 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20111024184152.384af3e8@corefixtop.gillibert.homelinux.net> |
| In reply to | #11937 |
Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 21, 9:35 am, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+n...@snipabacken.se> wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-10-20, Malcolm McLean wrote: > > > On Oct 20, 6:31 pm, Kaz Kylheku <k...@kylheku.com> wrote: > > > > >> Whatever people achieve in C is /in spite/ of the language. > > > > > Oh rubbish. > > > > I was going to write a much longer response, but your first sentence > > sums it up, really. > > quite. "Why Pascal Isn't My Favoutite Language" (or something like > that) is worth a read The original Pascal language was a teaching tool, although derivates of 1980's and 1990's (Object Pascal, Delphi), became complete programming languages. The C programming language was designed as practical system programming tools, and so was a good candidate at becoming popular for system programming. IMO, details of the language are not an important part of its success. If Dennis Ritchie had designed his language by adding the needed features (explicit pointer arithmetic, dynamic memory allocation, recursion) to Fortran, than, UNIX and the rest of the world, would probably be using his Fortran derivative. And, if Simula had a faster linker, C++ may have never been created by Bjarne Stroustrup ... -- André Gillibert
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 14 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web