Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #168196 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Amit <amitchoudhary0523@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2022-11-16 22:20 -0800 |
| Last post | 2022-12-04 07:35 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 213 — 30 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
size_t vs long. Amit <amitchoudhary0523@gmail.com> - 2022-11-16 22:20 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-17 02:44 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Amit <amitchoudhary0523@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 00:16 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Amit <amitchoudhary0523@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 00:28 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-17 07:59 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 05:09 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-11-17 13:45 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Amit <amitchoudhary0523@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 22:39 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Ike Naar <ike@sdf.org> - 2022-11-18 08:19 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-19 01:42 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 12:32 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-20 01:32 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-18 11:21 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 02:51 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 11:37 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 22:39 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2022-11-18 13:21 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2022-11-17 16:17 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-18 09:56 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-20 01:46 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-19 01:41 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2022-11-17 09:37 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-19 01:41 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 12:56 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 13:03 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-19 21:17 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 17:41 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-21 10:30 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2022-11-22 04:27 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-22 08:55 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-20 01:33 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 22:50 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-11-25 20:51 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-25 12:21 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-11-20 06:52 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2022-11-17 09:31 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 02:43 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 10:02 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-18 10:19 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-18 01:46 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-18 13:01 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-18 04:56 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-18 14:49 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-11-19 06:19 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 06:44 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-11-19 09:53 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-19 02:23 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-11-19 06:42 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-19 10:00 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-11-19 10:09 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 13:27 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-11-24 11:26 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-04 06:29 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-21 11:31 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 08:51 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-21 15:11 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-18 07:33 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-18 04:55 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2022-11-18 11:01 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-11-23 09:23 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2022-11-24 20:09 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-25 08:29 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-17 11:16 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 02:48 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-11-17 11:30 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 03:52 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-11-17 12:27 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Mark Bluemel <mark.bluemel@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 04:28 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 04:34 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2022-11-17 15:48 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Amit <amitchoudhary0523@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 22:36 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 04:28 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-11-17 12:46 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Paul N <gw7rib@aol.com> - 2022-11-17 05:24 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-11-17 16:20 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2022-11-17 15:55 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-19 01:43 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 12:47 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-20 01:33 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 22:38 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-20 01:51 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2022-11-20 15:43 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2022-11-20 15:29 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-11-17 16:59 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-18 10:30 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-11-17 12:47 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Ike Naar <ike@sdf.org> - 2022-11-17 13:15 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-17 15:01 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2022-11-17 15:24 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 21:48 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Opus <ifonly@youknew.org> - 2022-11-18 20:12 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-11-18 00:26 -0600
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-11-18 10:37 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-11-19 01:43 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 03:06 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-19 19:58 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 08:34 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Opus <ifonly@youknew.org> - 2022-11-20 20:11 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 20:48 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 21:57 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-11-22 02:33 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-25 12:01 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-11-23 09:28 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-23 13:29 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Dolores Filandro <dolfiland8@gmail.com> - 2022-11-25 17:26 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-26 09:15 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-26 14:50 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-26 18:02 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2022-11-27 10:36 -0700
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-27 18:23 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-27 15:35 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-27 15:39 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-27 23:56 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-29 00:51 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-29 06:29 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-29 03:43 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-11-29 12:43 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-29 04:56 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-29 08:11 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-29 05:18 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-29 18:53 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2022-12-10 16:04 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-11-29 17:19 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-29 18:55 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> - 2022-11-30 00:02 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-11-30 01:58 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-29 10:21 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Opus <ifonly@youknew.org> - 2022-11-29 19:42 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-29 19:00 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-11-29 13:47 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-11-29 22:45 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-30 00:42 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-30 00:44 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-30 23:31 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-11-30 23:35 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-01 09:08 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 04:23 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-03 16:42 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-12-01 02:47 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-01 09:14 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-01 12:41 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-12-01 23:53 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 21:30 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-03 13:48 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-05 00:17 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-13 13:12 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-03 14:55 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-12-03 09:35 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-12-03 14:56 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-12-03 15:33 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2022-12-03 20:51 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-12-03 15:58 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2022-12-03 21:12 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-12-03 17:22 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-12-03 23:58 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-12-03 19:25 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-12-03 23:44 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-12-03 19:22 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2022-12-03 16:41 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-12-03 17:24 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-12-01 10:04 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-01 19:14 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 04:49 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 05:13 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-12-02 07:17 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 08:07 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-02 16:32 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-12-02 16:58 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 12:46 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 21:32 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 21:41 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 21:42 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 21:49 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-04 12:49 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-12-03 12:59 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-12-04 11:54 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-12-02 14:58 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 21:17 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 21:38 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-12-03 03:39 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-13 01:45 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-12-13 20:18 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-14 01:20 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-12-16 03:03 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2023-01-05 01:21 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2023-01-05 01:41 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-05 16:53 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 01:29 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-06 10:51 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 02:19 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 02:43 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-06 14:56 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-01-06 16:26 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-06 19:51 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 12:52 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2023-01-05 15:38 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-05 14:05 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 01:30 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 10:06 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-03 18:11 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-13 01:46 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2022-12-10 17:24 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-12-10 11:51 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-10 21:09 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-11 20:49 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 10:18 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 21:24 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-03 16:54 +0100
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-12-03 12:48 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-12-04 11:55 -0500
Re: size_t vs long. Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-12-02 09:58 -0800
Re: size_t vs long. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-12-01 20:02 +0000
Re: size_t vs long. Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-04 07:35 -0800
Page 10 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 Next page →
| From | A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-13 01:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <42a6e679-d410-458a-88b6-340c85ef4faan@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168461 |
On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 17:09:46 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 07:38:57 UTC+2, A wrote: > > > It looks like you really do not know anything and are unfamiliar > > > with software development. You can not read text link to what you > > > paste yourself. > > That's why I said that most of your comments are non-sensical because you are saying that I am unfamiliar with software development because I can't read the whole text link that I pasted. > > > > Your inference is really non-sensical. > There was not in use any inference. I meant that there are three different > (orthogonal or mildly related) problems with you in action. > 1) low knowledge and bad ideas > 2) unfamiliarity software development > 3) inability to read documents > Each of three was demonstrated in parts of post you snipped. I actually don't care what you think about me. Amit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-13 20:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b46fbb29-7ad6-4823-b61d-5781bd4966b5n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168521 |
On Tuesday, 13 December 2022 at 11:45:54 UTC+2, A wrote: > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 17:09:46 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 07:38:57 UTC+2, A wrote: > > > > It looks like you really do not know anything and are unfamiliar > > > > with software development. You can not read text link to what you > > > > paste yourself. > > > That's why I said that most of your comments are non-sensical because you are saying that I am unfamiliar with software development because I can't read the whole text link that I pasted. > > > > > > Your inference is really non-sensical. > > There was not in use any inference. I meant that there are three different > > (orthogonal or mildly related) problems with you in action. > > 1) low knowledge and bad ideas > > 2) unfamiliarity software development > > 3) inability to read documents > > Each of three was demonstrated in parts of post you snipped. > > I actually don't care what you think about me. Oh? I don't think about you. World is full of people like you ... they are perfectly normal I think.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-14 01:20 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3c2dbb51-81eb-4fb7-a6e6-4c41dbfabd6dn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168542 |
On Wednesday, 14 December 2022 at 09:48:33 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > On Tuesday, 13 December 2022 at 11:45:54 UTC+2, A wrote: > > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 17:09:46 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > > > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 07:38:57 UTC+2, A wrote: > > > > > It looks like you really do not know anything and are unfamiliar > > > > > with software development. You can not read text link to what you > > > > > paste yourself. > > > > That's why I said that most of your comments are non-sensical because you are saying that I am unfamiliar with software development because I can't read the whole text link that I pasted. > > > > > > > > Your inference is really non-sensical. > > > There was not in use any inference. I meant that there are three different > > > (orthogonal or mildly related) problems with you in action. > > > 1) low knowledge and bad ideas > > > 2) unfamiliarity software development > > > 3) inability to read documents > > > Each of three was demonstrated in parts of post you snipped. > > > > I actually don't care what you think about me. > Oh? I don't think about you. World is full of people like you ... they > are perfectly normal I think. I think that you are a fool. How can you write about me without thinking about me? Your logic is total non-sense. I think you are over-estimating yourself and under-estimating me. Fuck you. Amit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-16 03:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <735cca53-0bcc-4084-b316-0ec9dc83fc64n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168544 |
On Wednesday, 14 December 2022 at 11:20:49 UTC+2, A wrote: > On Wednesday, 14 December 2022 at 09:48:33 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > > On Tuesday, 13 December 2022 at 11:45:54 UTC+2, A wrote: > > > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 17:09:46 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > > > > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 07:38:57 UTC+2, A wrote: > > > > > > It looks like you really do not know anything and are unfamiliar > > > > > > with software development. You can not read text link to what you > > > > > > paste yourself. > > > > > That's why I said that most of your comments are non-sensical because you are saying that I am unfamiliar with software development because I can't read the whole text link that I pasted. > > > > > > > > > > Your inference is really non-sensical. > > > > There was not in use any inference. I meant that there are three different > > > > (orthogonal or mildly related) problems with you in action. > > > > 1) low knowledge and bad ideas > > > > 2) unfamiliarity software development > > > > 3) inability to read documents > > > > Each of three was demonstrated in parts of post you snipped. > > > > > > I actually don't care what you think about me. > > Oh? I don't think about you. World is full of people like you ... they > > are perfectly normal I think. > I think that you are a fool. How can you write about me without thinking about me? Your logic is total non-sense. Why should I think about you when your mistakes and problems are common and do not matter to me? > I think you are over-estimating yourself and under-estimating me. > > Fuck you. You are angry at me? About your own mistakes? What an asshole. :D
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-05 01:21 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <409fc416-46de-4f2f-9ebc-24ceb2333544n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168561 |
On Friday, 16 December 2022 at 16:33:33 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > On Wednesday, 14 December 2022 at 11:20:49 UTC+2, A wrote: > > On Wednesday, 14 December 2022 at 09:48:33 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > > > On Tuesday, 13 December 2022 at 11:45:54 UTC+2, A wrote: > > > > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 17:09:46 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 07:38:57 UTC+2, A wrote: > > > > > > > It looks like you really do not know anything and are unfamiliar > > > > > > > with software development. You can not read text link to what you > > > > > > > paste yourself. > > > > > > That's why I said that most of your comments are non-sensical because you are saying that I am unfamiliar with software development because I can't read the whole text link that I pasted. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your inference is really non-sensical. > > > > > There was not in use any inference. I meant that there are three different > > > > > (orthogonal or mildly related) problems with you in action. > > > > > 1) low knowledge and bad ideas > > > > > 2) unfamiliarity software development > > > > > 3) inability to read documents > > > > > Each of three was demonstrated in parts of post you snipped. > > > > > > > > I actually don't care what you think about me. > > > Oh? I don't think about you. World is full of people like you ... they > > > are perfectly normal I think. > > I think that you are a fool. How can you write about me without thinking about me? Your logic is total non-sense. > Why should I think about you when your mistakes and problems > are common and do not matter to me? > > I think you are over-estimating yourself and under-estimating me. > > > > Fuck you. > You are angry at me? About your own mistakes? What an asshole. :D You are an asshole. You don't even understand simple logic. Besides, it was you who first started writing bad words in this email thread. You used the word "nonsense". And then I also used the words nonsense and non-sensical, etc. And then it boiled down to this. If you had refrained from using bad words in the first place, then I also wouldn't have abused you. I abused you because you abused me first. Since you abused me, so I abused you back. I am angry at you for not following email etiquettes when communicating with other people on internet in a mailing list, and I am angry at you for abusing me. So, fuck you again. As long as you keep replying to my reply, I will keep abusing you. If you don't want to get abused more, then don't reply to my reply. Amit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-05 01:41 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e3808ebe-c4e8-483e-8f3e-afc7b4413167n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168722 |
On Thursday, 5 January 2023 at 14:51:54 UTC+5:30, A wrote: > On Friday, 16 December 2022 at 16:33:33 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > > On Wednesday, 14 December 2022 at 11:20:49 UTC+2, A wrote: > > > On Wednesday, 14 December 2022 at 09:48:33 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, 13 December 2022 at 11:45:54 UTC+2, A wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 17:09:46 UTC+5:30, Öö Tiib wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 07:38:57 UTC+2, A wrote: > > > > > > > > It looks like you really do not know anything and are unfamiliar > > > > > > > > with software development. You can not read text link to what you > > > > > > > > paste yourself. > > > > > > > That's why I said that most of your comments are non-sensical because you are saying that I am unfamiliar with software development because I can't read the whole text link that I pasted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your inference is really non-sensical. > > > > > > There was not in use any inference. I meant that there are three different > > > > > > (orthogonal or mildly related) problems with you in action. > > > > > > 1) low knowledge and bad ideas > > > > > > 2) unfamiliarity software development > > > > > > 3) inability to read documents > > > > > > Each of three was demonstrated in parts of post you snipped. > > > > > > > > > > I actually don't care what you think about me. > > > > Oh? I don't think about you. World is full of people like you ... they > > > > are perfectly normal I think. > > > I think that you are a fool. How can you write about me without thinking about me? Your logic is total non-sense. > > Why should I think about you when your mistakes and problems > > are common and do not matter to me? > > > I think you are over-estimating yourself and under-estimating me. > > > > > > Fuck you. > > You are angry at me? About your own mistakes? What an asshole. :D > You are an asshole. You don't even understand simple logic. Besides, it was you who first started writing bad words in this email thread. You used the word "nonsense". And then I also used the words nonsense and non-sensical, etc. And then it boiled down to this. > > If you had refrained from using bad words in the first place, then I also wouldn't have abused you. > > I abused you because you abused me first. > > Since you abused me, so I abused you back. > > I am angry at you for not following email etiquettes when communicating with other people on internet in a mailing list, and I am angry at you for abusing me. > > So, fuck you again. > > As long as you keep replying to my reply, I will keep abusing you. > > If you don't want to get abused more, then don't reply to my reply. > > Amit By the way, don't think that I will not reply if you abuse me again. I may not reply immediately but I will reply some day (may be after a week, or after a month, etc.) You should first learn email/communication etiquettes when you are getting involved in a communication with other people on internet in a mailing list. I challenge you to prove that you are smarter than me. I am challenging you to a 3-game/5-game online chess matches and whoever loses will accept that he is a very stupid person and a super asshole. I will also publish the result in this email thread. I know you will not accept my challenge because you know that you are stupid. If you don't accept my challenge then this will mean that you are a very stupid person and a super asshole. Amit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-05 16:53 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tp6rqm$2ru6i$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #168723 |
On 05/01/2023 10:41, A wrote: > You should first learn email/communication etiquettes when you are > getting involved in a communication with other people on internet in > a mailing list. > Ôö is a long-standing and respected member of this group. You are not. The onus is on /you/ to learn about this group, and how to converse here. You are failing badly here. Amongst other things, most of us know when to leave a dead thread - you, on the other hand, resurrected this one after three weeks, merely to make a fool of yourself. You started this thread well enough, but got aggressive and abusive towards people who have explained why your ideas are not good, your understanding of how libraries work is wrong, and why common practice is the way it is. There's nothing wrong with suggesting an idea and being told that why it is not good in practice. There's nothing wrong with misunderstanding something and getting corrected - that is part of how we learn. But there /is/ something wrong with your attitude of denial and stubbornness. You come across as an inexperienced, insecure junior programmer - still immature enough to think that "challenging" experienced developers will let you "prove yourself". It will not. It will simply make people ignore you until you go away. It is conceivable that you are a particularly smart young guy, though you have not demonstrated that. But it is almost certainly the case that the people in this thread who have been advising you and helping you have /decades/ more experience than you do. Treat this as advice to a young person who has not yet learned how to behave amongst professionals - either in communication or programming. I write this for /your/ benefit (everyone else here can see that Ôö is right). Hopefully you will learn, and become a better communicator and a better programmer as a result - and hopefully also get involved constructively in threads here. We certainly need young folks to ask questions and start discussions - all we ask is that they are polite, and listen to the answers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 01:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e3d131bd-02ed-4a7d-8d48-e3c36f6b4679n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168727 |
On Thursday, 5 January 2023 at 21:24:12 UTC+5:30, David Brown wrote: > On 05/01/2023 10:41, A wrote: > > > You should first learn email/communication etiquettes when you are > > getting involved in a communication with other people on internet in > > a mailing list. > > > Ôö is a long-standing and respected member of this group. You are not. > The onus is on /you/ to learn about this group, and how to converse > here. You are failing badly here. Amongst other things, most of us > know when to leave a dead thread - you, on the other hand, resurrected > this one after three weeks, merely to make a fool of yourself. > > > You started this thread well enough, but got aggressive and abusive > towards people who have explained why your ideas are not good, your > understanding of how libraries work is wrong, and why common practice is > the way it is. > > There's nothing wrong with suggesting an idea and being told that why it > is not good in practice. There's nothing wrong with misunderstanding > something and getting corrected - that is part of how we learn. But > there /is/ something wrong with your attitude of denial and stubbornness. > > > You come across as an inexperienced, insecure junior programmer - still > immature enough to think that "challenging" experienced developers will > let you "prove yourself". It will not. It will simply make people > ignore you until you go away. > > It is conceivable that you are a particularly smart young guy, though > you have not demonstrated that. But it is almost certainly the case > that the people in this thread who have been advising you and helping > you have /decades/ more experience than you do. > > > Treat this as advice to a young person who has not yet learned how to > behave amongst professionals - either in communication or programming. > I write this for /your/ benefit (everyone else here can see that Ôö is > right). Hopefully you will learn, and become a better communicator and > a better programmer as a result - and hopefully also get involved > constructively in threads here. We certainly need young folks to ask > questions and start discussions - all we ask is that they are polite, > and listen to the answers. Oo first made this comment on my reply: "Why such nonsense is needed?" Then I started doing the same. In my opinion, Oo shouldn't have used the word "nonsense". This is an offensive word. So, I took offence. But, if you think that Oo didn't make any mistake by writing the word "nonsense", then please let me know. And, in that case I will not participate in this group anymore because I don't want to get abused and when I retaliated, then people are advising me that I am doing wrong. So, obviously, I don't want to participate in a group where when I get abused, people think that its ok and I should not retaliate back. Amit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 10:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tp8qv8$34ohj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #168735 |
On 06/01/2023 10:29, A wrote: > On Thursday, 5 January 2023 at 21:24:12 UTC+5:30, David Brown wrote: >> Treat this as advice to a young person who has not yet learned how >> to behave amongst professionals - either in communication or >> programming. I write this for /your/ benefit (everyone else here >> can see that Ôö is right). Hopefully you will learn, and become a >> better communicator and a better programmer as a result - and >> hopefully also get involved constructively in threads here. We >> certainly need young folks to ask questions and start discussions - >> all we ask is that they are polite, and listen to the answers. > > > Oo first made this comment on my reply: "Why such nonsense is > needed?" > > Then I started doing the same. > > In my opinion, Oo shouldn't have used the word "nonsense". This is an > offensive word. No, it is not an offensive word. If you write something that is nonsense, calling it "nonsense" is appropriate - it is helpful honesty. I think you are making the mistake of taking things far too personally. If I write something stupid, as we all do from time to time, I am happy for people to say "that was a stupid thing to write". I am /not/ happy for people to say "you are a stupid person", as that is entirely different. Do you understand the difference? If you do understand that, you will see that there is nothing offensive in saying you wrote nonsense - because some of the things you wrote were wrong or made no sense. (You can, of course, disagree with that opinion - either way it is not offensive.) And if you don't understand the difference between commenting on something you said or wrote, and a personal attack or insult, then you had better learn it or you'll have an unhappy time with pretty much any serious communication with anyone. > > So, I took offence. You were completely wrong to do so. > > But, if you think that Oo didn't make any mistake by writing the word > "nonsense", then please let me know. > > And, in that case I will not participate in this group anymore > because I don't want to get abused and when I retaliated, then people > are advising me that I am doing wrong. So, obviously, I don't want to > participate in a group where when I get abused, people think that its > ok and I should not retaliate back. > Even if Öö had insulted you or been offensive - which is not the case - then you were /wrong/ to retaliate and certainly wrong to over-react as you did. This is not kindergarten - this is real life. You do not get to make some scribbles on a page and expect people to say "that's lovely" and hang it on the fridge. If you write something, you must expect honest criticism of it - and even for people to say you are completely wrong if that's what they think. And no, swearing and insulting is /not/ an appropriate response to criticism. Retaliation is /not/ okay, even if offence was actually given. If people here thought you were actually being abused, someone would have told Öö to stop. If all that means you leave the group, that's up to you. I'd prefer you think about these comments, change your attitude, and stay. I don't know that you'll find any other group or forum in which you'll be happy until you learn to accept that disagreement is not offensive, and tantrums are never appropriate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 02:19 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3f683e9b-2c76-4245-a1c2-b0f178f90e28n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168737 |
On Friday, 6 January 2023 at 15:21:51 UTC+5:30, David Brown wrote: > On 06/01/2023 10:29, A wrote: > > On Thursday, 5 January 2023 at 21:24:12 UTC+5:30, David Brown wrote: > > >> Treat this as advice to a young person who has not yet learned how > >> to behave amongst professionals - either in communication or > >> programming. I write this for /your/ benefit (everyone else here > >> can see that Ôö is right). Hopefully you will learn, and become a > >> better communicator and a better programmer as a result - and > >> hopefully also get involved constructively in threads here. We > >> certainly need young folks to ask questions and start discussions - > >> all we ask is that they are polite, and listen to the answers. > > > > > > Oo first made this comment on my reply: "Why such nonsense is > > needed?" > > > > Then I started doing the same. > > > > In my opinion, Oo shouldn't have used the word "nonsense". This is an > > offensive word. > No, it is not an offensive word. > > If you write something that is nonsense, calling it "nonsense" is > appropriate - it is helpful honesty. > > I think you are making the mistake of taking things far too personally. > If I write something stupid, as we all do from time to time, I am > happy for people to say "that was a stupid thing to write". I am /not/ > happy for people to say "you are a stupid person", as that is entirely > different. > > Do you understand the difference? > > If you do understand that, you will see that there is nothing offensive > in saying you wrote nonsense - because some of the things you wrote were > wrong or made no sense. (You can, of course, disagree with that opinion > - either way it is not offensive.) > > And if you don't understand the difference between commenting on > something you said or wrote, and a personal attack or insult, then you > had better learn it or you'll have an unhappy time with pretty much any > serious communication with anyone. > > > > > So, I took offence. > > You were completely wrong to do so. > > > > But, if you think that Oo didn't make any mistake by writing the word > > "nonsense", then please let me know. > > > > And, in that case I will not participate in this group anymore > > because I don't want to get abused and when I retaliated, then people > > are advising me that I am doing wrong. So, obviously, I don't want to > > participate in a group where when I get abused, people think that its > > ok and I should not retaliate back. > > > Even if Öö had insulted you or been offensive - which is not the case - > then you were /wrong/ to retaliate and certainly wrong to over-react as > you did. > > > This is not kindergarten - this is real life. You do not get to make > some scribbles on a page and expect people to say "that's lovely" and > hang it on the fridge. If you write something, you must expect honest > criticism of it - and even for people to say you are completely wrong if > that's what they think. > > And no, swearing and insulting is /not/ an appropriate response to > criticism. Retaliation is /not/ okay, even if offence was actually > given. If people here thought you were actually being abused, someone > would have told Öö to stop. > > > If all that means you leave the group, that's up to you. I'd prefer you > think about these comments, change your attitude, and stay. I don't > know that you'll find any other group or forum in which you'll be happy > until you learn to accept that disagreement is not offensive, and > tantrums are never appropriate. I am not part of any group or forum. I just join some group for a specific purpose. Joining this group was also for a specific purpose (size_t vs long). By the way, people here think that I am naive/junior programmer/inexperienced programmer/I am not right/I gave illogical reasons/I am stubborn, etc. then I must say that there are many people like me in this world who think the same about size_t vs long as I do. Few examples are: * https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/issues/3493 * https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwie49jO1bL8AhVqBbcAHdnIDes4HhAWegQIBxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fraksy.dyndns.org%2Funsigned.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1iDgwhfEQHzvIRWwY-tXsf * https://gustedt.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/a-praise-of-size_t-and-other-unsigned-types/: Again I had a discussion with someone from a C++ background who claimed that one should use signed integer types where possible, and who also claimed that the unsignedness of size_t is merely a historical accident and would never be defined as such nowadays. I strongly disagree with that, so I decided to write this up, for once. I searched on google for "is size_t in C a mistake". May be, if you people also search for similar terms then you will find that there are many people like me in this world. By the way, please don't say that it is C++. C++ has borrowed the concept of size_t from C. Also, Java doesn't have unsigned types and Java is a hugely popular and successful language. Anyways, my opinion had differed from you people but this doesn't mean that I am naive/inexperienced programmer, etc. There are many people like me in this world who think the same about size_t vs long as me. Even "James Gosling - inventor of Java language", didn't believe in unsigned, the same opinion as mine. Even James Gosling, who is known all over the world, holds the same view as mine about unsigned and I am very happy about it. I don't care if few people call me naive/inexperienced, etc. because James Gosling's view about unsigned is the same as mine. Amit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 02:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b7385d9f-2fba-4790-a73e-5899289b10ean@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168738 |
On Friday, 6 January 2023 at 10:20:02 UTC, A wrote: > On Friday, 6 January 2023 at 15:21:51 UTC+5:30, David Brown wrote: > > On 06/01/2023 10:29, A wrote: > > > On Thursday, 5 January 2023 at 21:24:12 UTC+5:30, David Brown wrote: > > > > >> Treat this as advice to a young person who has not yet learned how > > >> to behave amongst professionals - either in communication or > > >> programming. I write this for /your/ benefit (everyone else here > > >> can see that Ôö is right). Hopefully you will learn, and become a > > >> better communicator and a better programmer as a result - and > > >> hopefully also get involved constructively in threads here. We > > >> certainly need young folks to ask questions and start discussions - > > >> all we ask is that they are polite, and listen to the answers. > > > > > > > > > Oo first made this comment on my reply: "Why such nonsense is > > > needed?" > > > > > > Then I started doing the same. > > > > > > In my opinion, Oo shouldn't have used the word "nonsense". This is an > > > offensive word. > > No, it is not an offensive word. > > > > If you write something that is nonsense, calling it "nonsense" is > > appropriate - it is helpful honesty. > > > > I think you are making the mistake of taking things far too personally. > > If I write something stupid, as we all do from time to time, I am > > happy for people to say "that was a stupid thing to write". I am /not/ > > happy for people to say "you are a stupid person", as that is entirely > > different. > > > > Do you understand the difference? > > > > If you do understand that, you will see that there is nothing offensive > > in saying you wrote nonsense - because some of the things you wrote were > > wrong or made no sense. (You can, of course, disagree with that opinion > > - either way it is not offensive.) > > > > And if you don't understand the difference between commenting on > > something you said or wrote, and a personal attack or insult, then you > > had better learn it or you'll have an unhappy time with pretty much any > > serious communication with anyone. > > > > > > > > So, I took offence. > > > > You were completely wrong to do so. > > > > > > But, if you think that Oo didn't make any mistake by writing the word > > > "nonsense", then please let me know. > > > > > > And, in that case I will not participate in this group anymore > > > because I don't want to get abused and when I retaliated, then people > > > are advising me that I am doing wrong. So, obviously, I don't want to > > > participate in a group where when I get abused, people think that its > > > ok and I should not retaliate back. > > > > > Even if Öö had insulted you or been offensive - which is not the case - > > then you were /wrong/ to retaliate and certainly wrong to over-react as > > you did. > > > > > > This is not kindergarten - this is real life. You do not get to make > > some scribbles on a page and expect people to say "that's lovely" and > > hang it on the fridge. If you write something, you must expect honest > > criticism of it - and even for people to say you are completely wrong if > > that's what they think. > > > > And no, swearing and insulting is /not/ an appropriate response to > > criticism. Retaliation is /not/ okay, even if offence was actually > > given. If people here thought you were actually being abused, someone > > would have told Öö to stop. > > > > > > If all that means you leave the group, that's up to you. I'd prefer you > > think about these comments, change your attitude, and stay. I don't > > know that you'll find any other group or forum in which you'll be happy > > until you learn to accept that disagreement is not offensive, and > > tantrums are never appropriate. > I am not part of any group or forum. I just join some group for a specific purpose. Joining this group was also for a specific purpose (size_t vs long). > > By the way, people here think that I am naive/junior programmer/inexperienced programmer/I am not right/I gave illogical reasons/I am stubborn, etc. then I must say that there are many people like me in this world who think the same about size_t vs long as I do. > > Few examples are: > > * https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/issues/3493 > > * https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwie49jO1bL8AhVqBbcAHdnIDes4HhAWegQIBxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fraksy.dyndns.org%2Funsigned.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1iDgwhfEQHzvIRWwY-tXsf > > * https://gustedt.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/a-praise-of-size_t-and-other-unsigned-types/: Again I had a discussion with someone from a C++ background who claimed that one should use signed integer types where possible, and who also claimed that the unsignedness of size_t is merely a historical accident and would never be defined as such nowadays. I strongly disagree with that, so I decided to write this up, for once. > > I searched on google for "is size_t in C a mistake". May be, if you people also search for similar terms then you will find that there are many people like me in this world. > > By the way, please don't say that it is C++. C++ has borrowed the concept of size_t from C. > > Also, Java doesn't have unsigned types and Java is a hugely popular and successful language. > > Anyways, my opinion had differed from you people but this doesn't mean that I am naive/inexperienced programmer, etc. There are many people like me in this world who think the same about size_t vs long as me. > > Even "James Gosling - inventor of Java language", didn't believe in unsigned, the same opinion as mine. Even James Gosling, who is known all over the world, holds the same view as mine about unsigned and I am very happy about it. I don't care if few people call me naive/inexperienced, etc. because James Gosling's view about unsigned is the same as mine. > I dislike size_t. The problem isn't so much that there is a special type to hold a size of things in memory. It's that it's also used to hold counts of things in memory. Which means that the index variable is also forced to be size_t. So we have a misleading name, a variable which is probably too wide for the sanity limit on the array, and an unsigned variable when intermediate index calculations can often go negative, e..g with an averaging filter, or if you are counting from 0 to N-1, and the array can empty.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 14:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tp99a2$363vu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #168738 |
On 06/01/2023 11:19, A wrote: > On Friday, 6 January 2023 at 15:21:51 UTC+5:30, David Brown wrote: >> On 06/01/2023 10:29, A wrote: >>> On Thursday, 5 January 2023 at 21:24:12 UTC+5:30, David Brown >>> wrote: >> >>>> Treat this as advice to a young person who has not yet learned >>>> how to behave amongst professionals - either in communication >>>> or programming. I write this for /your/ benefit (everyone else >>>> here can see that Ôö is right). Hopefully you will learn, and >>>> become a better communicator and a better programmer as a >>>> result - and hopefully also get involved constructively in >>>> threads here. We certainly need young folks to ask questions >>>> and start discussions - all we ask is that they are polite, and >>>> listen to the answers. >>> >>> >>> Oo first made this comment on my reply: "Why such nonsense is >>> needed?" >>> >>> Then I started doing the same. >>> >>> In my opinion, Oo shouldn't have used the word "nonsense". This >>> is an offensive word. >> No, it is not an offensive word. >> >> If you write something that is nonsense, calling it "nonsense" is >> appropriate - it is helpful honesty. >> >> I think you are making the mistake of taking things far too >> personally. If I write something stupid, as we all do from time to >> time, I am happy for people to say "that was a stupid thing to >> write". I am /not/ happy for people to say "you are a stupid >> person", as that is entirely different. >> >> Do you understand the difference? >> >> If you do understand that, you will see that there is nothing >> offensive in saying you wrote nonsense - because some of the things >> you wrote were wrong or made no sense. (You can, of course, >> disagree with that opinion - either way it is not offensive.) >> >> And if you don't understand the difference between commenting on >> something you said or wrote, and a personal attack or insult, then >> you had better learn it or you'll have an unhappy time with pretty >> much any serious communication with anyone. >> >>> >>> So, I took offence. >> >> You were completely wrong to do so. >>> >>> But, if you think that Oo didn't make any mistake by writing the >>> word "nonsense", then please let me know. >>> >>> And, in that case I will not participate in this group anymore >>> because I don't want to get abused and when I retaliated, then >>> people are advising me that I am doing wrong. So, obviously, I >>> don't want to participate in a group where when I get abused, >>> people think that its ok and I should not retaliate back. >>> >> Even if Öö had insulted you or been offensive - which is not the >> case - then you were /wrong/ to retaliate and certainly wrong to >> over-react as you did. >> >> >> This is not kindergarten - this is real life. You do not get to >> make some scribbles on a page and expect people to say "that's >> lovely" and hang it on the fridge. If you write something, you must >> expect honest criticism of it - and even for people to say you are >> completely wrong if that's what they think. >> >> And no, swearing and insulting is /not/ an appropriate response to >> criticism. Retaliation is /not/ okay, even if offence was actually >> given. If people here thought you were actually being abused, >> someone would have told Öö to stop. >> >> >> If all that means you leave the group, that's up to you. I'd prefer >> you think about these comments, change your attitude, and stay. I >> don't know that you'll find any other group or forum in which >> you'll be happy until you learn to accept that disagreement is not >> offensive, and tantrums are never appropriate. > > > I am not part of any group or forum. I just join some group for a > specific purpose. Joining this group was also for a specific purpose > (size_t vs long). > > By the way, people here think that I am naive/junior > programmer/inexperienced programmer/I am not right/I gave illogical > reasons/I am stubborn, etc. then I must say that there are many > people like me in this world who think the same about size_t vs long > as I do. Whoa, you have certainly missed the point here! You can have opinions on whether signed types or unsigned types are better for particular usage. That's opinion, and you'll find many people with many different thoughts on the matter. (And most people will say "it depends".) You cannot have opinions on the /standard/ type used for sizes in C - it's a /fact/ that it is unsigned "size_t". It doesn't matter whether that choice was a good idea or not - the choice was made and it is unchangeable. But no one thinks you are being immature and showing inexperience for questioning the use of "size_t", or suggesting that "long" might be better for your use-cases. We think you are being immature and lacking experience because of the way you have been discussing the matter. Question all you want, but listen to the answers - don't pick fights with people who show you why your reasoning or understanding is weak. > > Few examples are: > > * https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/issues/3493 > That refers to the Google C++ Style Guide, which does /not/ say avoid unsigned types or prefer "long" to "size_t". It merely advises against using unsigned types inappropriately, and to be cautious about mixing signedness of types. (That's very good advice.) > * > https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwie49jO1bL8AhVqBbcAHdnIDes4HhAWegQIBxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fraksy.dyndns.org%2Funsigned.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1iDgwhfEQHzvIRWwY-tXsf > I'm happy to look at clear links from a reliable source, but not cryptic and mangled links. > * > https://gustedt.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/a-praise-of-size_t-and-other-unsigned-types/ Did you read that link? It gives some reasons why unsigned types - "size_t" in particular - are appropriate for sizes and indices. We all know that some people prefer signed types when there is a choice, and some people prefer unsigned types. Sometimes they give good reasons for the choice, sometimes bad reasons. Sometimes it is just personal preference. But again, it is not the question that is causing complaints - it is what you write and the way you react to and treat other people that is at issue.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 16:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vYXtL.56958$Ldj8.11769@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #168740 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: >On 06/01/2023 11:19, A wrote: >> On Friday, 6 January 2023 at 15:21:51 UTC+5:30, David Brown wrote: >> * >> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwie49jO1bL8AhVqBbcAHdnIDes4HhAWegQIBxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fraksy.dyndns.org%2Funsigned.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1iDgwhfEQHzvIRWwY-tXsf >> > >I'm happy to look at clear links from a reliable source, but not cryptic >and mangled links. To be fair, https%3A%2F%2Fraksy.dyndns.org%2Funsigned.pdf can be exatracted from the google search result link (personally, ever since they started wrapping URLs so one bounces through google first, I stopped clicking on google search result links).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 19:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tp9qjv$3818v$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #168742 |
On 06/01/2023 17:26, Scott Lurndal wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: >> On 06/01/2023 11:19, A wrote: >>> On Friday, 6 January 2023 at 15:21:51 UTC+5:30, David Brown wrote: > >>> * >>> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwie49jO1bL8AhVqBbcAHdnIDes4HhAWegQIBxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fraksy.dyndns.org%2Funsigned.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1iDgwhfEQHzvIRWwY-tXsf >>> >> >> I'm happy to look at clear links from a reliable source, but not cryptic >> and mangled links. > > To be fair, https%3A%2F%2Fraksy.dyndns.org%2Funsigned.pdf can > be exatracted from the google search result link (personally, ever > since they started wrapping URLs so one bounces through google > first, I stopped clicking on google search result links). Yes, but I usually avoid clicking on links from unknown people to unknown addresses - and a dyndns.org address is likely to be someone's machine at their home. I know what github.com is, I know who Jens Gustedt is, and I am happy to follow those links.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 12:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <14223a5d-8838-497a-8132-950edeb9422an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168740 |
On Friday, 6 January 2023 at 13:56:33 UTC, David Brown wrote: > > > * > > https://gustedt.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/a-praise-of-size_t-and-other-unsigned-types/ > > Did you read that link? It gives some reasons why unsigned types - > "size_t" in particular - are appropriate for sizes and indices. > > We all know that some people prefer signed types when there is a choice, > and some people prefer unsigned types. Sometimes they give good reasons > for the choice, sometimes bad reasons. Sometimes it is just personal > preference. > It depends a lot on the level at which you work. If your main focus is on defining algorithms, then you need two checks to test if a signed index is in range of an array, and one check if the index is unsigned. This is extremely unlikely to be significant. If your main focus is writing very low level code for tiny processors, the extra check could well be a serious unneeded cost - possibly in code size rather than execution time. If the code has to be portable, then saving a bit is unlikely to help much. Realistically you'll need more than that slop. If the code is written for a specific platform, so you know the width of the variables and the size of the dataset, then you might want the extra bit an unsigned value gives to squeeze out a bit of extra range. If you are working primarily with algorithms, you are quite likely to need complicated calculations on index values which can go negative. If you're working primarily with driver type code, this will occur less often.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-05 15:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <IyGtL.228907$iS99.92028@fx16.iad> |
| In reply to | #168723 |
On 1/5/2023 4:41 AM, A wrote: > On Thursday, 5 January 2023 at 14:51:54 UTC+5:30, A wrote: > > I challenge you to prove that you are smarter than me. You just challenged yourself to prove to yourself that you're smarter than yourself. We're obviously looking at a genius here...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-05 14:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87lemgocvx.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #168723 |
A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
> By the way, don't think that I will not reply if you abuse me again. I
> may not reply immediately but I will reply some day (may be after a
> week, or after a month, etc.)
>
> You should first learn email/communication etiquettes when you are
> getting involved in a communication with other people on internet in a
> mailing list.
>
[...]
>
> If you don't accept my challenge then this will mean that you are a
> very stupid person and a super asshole.
A minor point: This is a Usenet newsgroup, not email, not a mailing
list. If I'm not mistaken, Usenet actually predates the Internet.
My typical response to behavior like yours would be to add you to my
killfile. That means that my newsreader would filter out everything you
post, and I would never see it. (The newsreader I use provides an
alternative that marks everything you post as if I had already read it,
so I'll still see it but I'll be reminded not to respond, but the effect
is similar.) Like a lot of users, I do this when it becomes clear that
the newsgroup would be improved by someone's absence. I can't remove a
user or control anyone else's behavior, but I can create for myself a
filtered view of a newsgroup that excludes a particular user.
I haven't done that yet because you're new here. It may still be
possible for you to become a useful participant.
My advice: Stop the insults. Don't post anything here that isn't about
C, the topic of this newsgroup. Don't engage in personal arguments.
Learn to deal gracefully with people disagreeing with you. If someone
insults you, ignore it or take it elsewhere (many users post with valid
email addresses).
Take a look at the archives of the group and get a feel for how we do
things here.
If you don't do all of this *very soon*, I will add you to my killfile,
and if enough regular participants choose to do the same, you will not
be able to participate here in any meaningful way.
(Arguably I am violating my own advice with this post, but discussions
about topicality are conventionally accepted as topical.)
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 01:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ec8aa9a0-3b81-4d03-a07d-8fb25a8f3747n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #168733 |
On Friday, 6 January 2023 at 03:36:08 UTC+5:30, Keith Thompson wrote:
> A <amit2342...@gmail.com> writes:
> [...]
> > By the way, don't think that I will not reply if you abuse me again. I
> > may not reply immediately but I will reply some day (may be after a
> > week, or after a month, etc.)
> >
> > You should first learn email/communication etiquettes when you are
> > getting involved in a communication with other people on internet in a
> > mailing list.
> >
> [...]
> >
> > If you don't accept my challenge then this will mean that you are a
> > very stupid person and a super asshole.
> A minor point: This is a Usenet newsgroup, not email, not a mailing
> list. If I'm not mistaken, Usenet actually predates the Internet.
>
> My typical response to behavior like yours would be to add you to my
> killfile. That means that my newsreader would filter out everything you
> post, and I would never see it. (The newsreader I use provides an
> alternative that marks everything you post as if I had already read it,
> so I'll still see it but I'll be reminded not to respond, but the effect
> is similar.) Like a lot of users, I do this when it becomes clear that
> the newsgroup would be improved by someone's absence. I can't remove a
> user or control anyone else's behavior, but I can create for myself a
> filtered view of a newsgroup that excludes a particular user.
>
> I haven't done that yet because you're new here. It may still be
> possible for you to become a useful participant.
>
> My advice: Stop the insults. Don't post anything here that isn't about
> C, the topic of this newsgroup. Don't engage in personal arguments.
> Learn to deal gracefully with people disagreeing with you. If someone
> insults you, ignore it or take it elsewhere (many users post with valid
> email addresses).
>
> Take a look at the archives of the group and get a feel for how we do
> things here.
>
> If you don't do all of this *very soon*, I will add you to my killfile,
> and if enough regular participants choose to do the same, you will not
> be able to participate here in any meaningful way.
>
> (Arguably I am violating my own advice with this post, but discussions
> about topicality are conventionally accepted as topical.)
>
> --
> Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.T...@gmail.com
> Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs
> void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
Oo first made this comment on my reply: "Why such nonsense is needed?"
Then I started doing the same.
In my opinion, Oo shouldn't have used the word "nonsense". This is an offensive word.
So, I took offence.
But, if you think that Oo didn't make any mistake by writing the word "nonsense", then please let me know.
And, in that case I will not participate in this group anymore because I don't want to get abused and when I retaliated, then people are advising me that I am doing wrong. So, obviously, I don't want to participate in a group where when I get abused, people think that its ok and I should not retaliate back.
Amit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 10:06 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87cz7ro7w7.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #168736 |
A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> writes:
> On Friday, 6 January 2023 at 03:36:08 UTC+5:30, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> A <amit2342...@gmail.com> writes:
>> [...]
>> > By the way, don't think that I will not reply if you abuse me again. I
>> > may not reply immediately but I will reply some day (may be after a
>> > week, or after a month, etc.)
>> >
>> > You should first learn email/communication etiquettes when you are
>> > getting involved in a communication with other people on internet in a
>> > mailing list.
>> >
>> [...]
>> >
>> > If you don't accept my challenge then this will mean that you are a
>> > very stupid person and a super asshole.
>> A minor point: This is a Usenet newsgroup, not email, not a mailing
>> list. If I'm not mistaken, Usenet actually predates the Internet.
>>
>> My typical response to behavior like yours would be to add you to my
>> killfile. That means that my newsreader would filter out everything you
>> post, and I would never see it. (The newsreader I use provides an
>> alternative that marks everything you post as if I had already read it,
>> so I'll still see it but I'll be reminded not to respond, but the effect
>> is similar.) Like a lot of users, I do this when it becomes clear that
>> the newsgroup would be improved by someone's absence. I can't remove a
>> user or control anyone else's behavior, but I can create for myself a
>> filtered view of a newsgroup that excludes a particular user.
>>
>> I haven't done that yet because you're new here. It may still be
>> possible for you to become a useful participant.
>>
>> My advice: Stop the insults. Don't post anything here that isn't about
>> C, the topic of this newsgroup. Don't engage in personal arguments.
>> Learn to deal gracefully with people disagreeing with you. If someone
>> insults you, ignore it or take it elsewhere (many users post with valid
>> email addresses).
>>
>> Take a look at the archives of the group and get a feel for how we do
>> things here.
>>
>> If you don't do all of this *very soon*, I will add you to my killfile,
>> and if enough regular participants choose to do the same, you will not
>> be able to participate here in any meaningful way.
>>
>> (Arguably I am violating my own advice with this post, but discussions
>> about topicality are conventionally accepted as topical.)
>
> Oo first made this comment on my reply: "Why such nonsense is needed?"
>
> Then I started doing the same.
>
> In my opinion, Oo shouldn't have used the word "nonsense". This is an
> offensive word.
That's a matter of opinion. In fact, some things are nonsense.
> So, I took offence.
>
> But, if you think that Oo didn't make any mistake by writing the word
> "nonsense", then please let me know.
I just took a quick look, and I can understand if you thought his use of
the word "nonsense" was a bit harsh. But he applied it to a technical
issue, not as a personal attack. It led to an escalating heated
argument full of personal insults, many of them from you.
If you're going to escalate anything you perceive (correctly or not) as
a personal insult, you will be partly responsible for making this
newsgroup a less pleasant experience, and I will filter you out of my
personal view of it. (Others are likely to do the same.) I don't come
here to comp.lang.c to watch people insult each other. It's *boring*.
> And, in that case I will not participate in this group anymore because
> I don't want to get abused and when I retaliated, then people are
> advising me that I am doing wrong. So, obviously, I don't want to
> participate in a group where when I get abused, people think that its
> ok and I should not retaliate back.
Don't retaliate. If someone actually insults you personally, my advice
is to ignore it, killfile the person who insulted you if you like, and
move on.
If you choose not to participate here, that's your right; I don't think
anyone is going to beg you to stay. If you stay, we discuss the C
programming language, and you're welcome to join us in doing that.
As for the technical issues you've raised (you advocate using long
rather than size_t), there are very popular systems where size_t is 64
bits and long is 32 bits so your approach would not work. You have
never addressed that (unless I missed something). That's a separate
issue from the insults; if you don't respond to technical points about
issues that you raise, you're not really participating.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-03 18:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <yjMiL.15905$z011.4689@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #168456 |
A <amit234234234234@gmail.com> writes: > >> It looks like you really do not know anything and are unfamiliar >> with software development. You can not read text link to what you >> paste yourself. > >That's why I said that most of your comments are non-sensical because you are saying that I am unfamiliar with software development because I can't read the whole text link that I pasted. > >Your inference is really non-sensical. > >Amit From my perspective, nothing you've posted to date as shown that you've had anything to do with professional software development; just pointless arguments about things that have been settled for close to half a century.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 10 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web